The Black Vault Message Forums

Discover the Truth!        

General Discussion Topics

Julian Assange fails in bid to block extradition to Sweden

The Black Vault Message Forums has a considerable number of niche forums to place your post. If you can not find a home for it, and the topic doesn't fit anywhere else, then post it here.

Postby greeney2 » Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:55 am

rath wrote:The fact is Bradly Manning could have passed this information regarding US war crimes onto anybody who then could have uploaded the information onto the wikileaks site themselves.

Bradly Manning may have even passed the information onto China or Russia or a number of other country's or terrorist groups who used the wikileaks site to hide there own involvement in the matter while gaining international coverage at the same time.


Even you arn't dumb enough to believe that! :roll:

What is does show, becasue usually the last thing people say reviels desparation, is that suggesting this assinine senerio, only shows you know this guy Assange is guilty as sin, regarding his Conspiracy with Bradley Manning to get these documents. What an embarrassing, cowardly, way he is acting, throwing Bradley Manning under the bus, after he got those documents. He defied all warnings to not publish them for months, and with no regard to the results to Bradley Manning, posted them knowing full well, what would happen to Manning.

Assange is such a piece of crap on so many levels its pathetic, and you are desparate defending him.
greeney2
 
Posts: 9595
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby rath » Sat Jun 02, 2012 1:51 pm

greeney2 wrote:
rath wrote:The fact is Bradly Manning could have passed this information regarding US war crimes onto anybody who then could have uploaded the information onto the wikileaks site themselves.

Bradly Manning may have even passed the information onto China or Russia or a number of other country's or terrorist groups who used the wikileaks site to hide there own involvement in the matter while gaining international coverage at the same time.


Even you arn't dumb enough to believe that! :roll:

What is does show, becasue usually the last thing people say reviels desparation, is that suggesting this assinine senerio, only shows you know this guy Assange is guilty as sin, regarding his Conspiracy with Bradley Manning to get these documents. What an embarrassing, cowardly, way he is acting, throwing Bradley Manning under the bus, after he got those documents. He defied all warnings to not publish them for months, and with no regard to the results to Bradley Manning, posted them knowing full well, what would happen to Manning.

Assange is such a piece of crap on so many levels its pathetic, and you are desparate defending him.


It does not matter what i think, i matters what you & the u.s government can prove.
Image
rath
 
Posts: 4345
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby rath » Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:07 pm

greeney2 wrote:If he is so innocent, why is he such a coward to just answer questions. But thanks or prooving you really do not know squat about the law. I though Austrailians were brave men, unafraid to stand up to anyone. Some Hero! :lol:
We'll see who wins in court.


A) we can all see that it is your good self, who has failed to grasp the facts of this case my friend.

You still go on about rape, ........ what rape?

((( The sex was consensual. )))

B) This will go to court & Sweden will become a joke.

Apparently having consensual sex in Sweden without a condom is punishable by a term of imprisonment of a minimum of two years for rape.

That is the basis for a reinstitution of rape charges against WikiLeaks figurehead Julian Assange that is destined to make Sweden and its justice system the laughing stock of the world and dramatically damage its reputation as a model of modernity.

Sweden’s Public Prosecutor’s Office was embarrassed in August this year when it leaked to the media that it was seeking to arrest Assange for rape, then on the same day withdrew the arrest warrant because in its own words there was “no evidence”. The damage to Assange’s reputation is incalculable. More than three quarters of internet references to his name refer to rape. Now, three months on and three prosecutors later, the Swedes seem to be clear on their basis to proceed. Consensual sex that started out with a condom ended up without one, ergo, the sex was not consensual.

For three months Assange had been waiting in vain to hear whether media statements by and for the two female “victims” that there was no fear or violence were going to be embellished so the charges might be carried forward due to greater seriousness. Such statements would stop a rape charge in any Western country dead in its tracks. Rape is a crime of violence, duress or deception. You can rape someone by deluding them into thinking you are someone else or by drugging them or by reason of their young age but essentially it’s a crime of violence.

The women here are near to and over 30 and have international experience, some of it working in Swedish government embassies. There is no suggestion of drugs nor identity concealment. Far from it. Both women boasted of their celebrity connection to Assange after the events that they would now see him destroyed for.

That further evidence hasn’t been confected to make the charges less absurd does Sweden no credit because it has no choice in the matter. The phenomena of social networking through the internet and mobile phones constrains Swedish authorities from augmenting the evidence against Assange because it would look even less credible in the face of tweets by Anna Ardin and SMS texts by Sofia Wilén boasting of their respective conquests after the “crimes”.

In the case of Ardin it is clear that she has thrown a party in Assange’s honour at her flat after the “crime” and tweeted to her followers that she is with the “the world’s coolest smartest people, it’s amazing!”. Go on the internet and see for yourself. That Ardin has sought unsuccessfully to delete these exculpatory tweets from the public record should be a matter of grave concern. That she has published on the internet a guide on how to get revenge on cheating boyfriends ever graver. The exact content of Wilén’s mobile phone texts is not yet known but their bragging and exculpatory character has been confirmed by Swedish prosecutors. Niether Wilén’s nor Ardin’s texts complain of rape.

But then neither Arden nor Wilén complained to the police but rather “sought advice”, a technique in Sweden enabling citizens to avoid just punishment for making false complaints. They sought advice together, having collaborated and irrevocably tainted each other’s evidence beforehand. Their SMS texts to each other show a plan to contact the Swedish newspaper Expressen beforehand in order to maximise the damage to Assange. They belong to the same political group and attended a public lecture given by Assange and organised by them. You can see Wilén on the YouTube video of the event even now.


The consent of both women to sex with Assange has been confirmed by prosecutors.

Proposed reforms of Swedish rape laws would introduce a test of whether the unequal power relations between the parties might void the sincerely expressed consent of one party. In this case, presumably, the politically active Ardin, with experience fielding gender equity complaints as a gender equity officer at Uppsala University, had her will suborned by Assange’s celebrity. The prosecutor coming as she does from a prosecution “Development Unit” could achieve this broadening of the law during Assange’s trial so he can be convicted of a crime that didn’t exist at the time he allegedly committed it. She would need to. There is no precedent for it. The Swedes are making it up as they go along.

A great deal more damning evidence is yet to be revealed about what passes for legal process in Sweden, such as Assange’s lawyers having not received a single official document until November 18, 2010 (and then in Swedish language contrary to European Law) and having to learn about the status of investigations through prosecution media announcements but make no mistake: it is not Julian Assange that is on trial here but Sweden and its reputation as a modern and model country with rules of law.
Image
rath
 
Posts: 4345
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby greeney2 » Sat Jun 02, 2012 3:16 pm

rath wrote:
greeney2 wrote:
rath wrote:The fact is Bradly Manning could have passed this information regarding US war crimes onto anybody who then could have uploaded the information onto the wikileaks site themselves.

Bradly Manning may have even passed the information onto China or Russia or a number of other country's or terrorist groups who used the wikileaks site to hide there own involvement in the matter while gaining international coverage at the same time.


Even you arn't dumb enough to believe that! :roll:

What is does show, becasue usually the last thing people say reviels desparation, is that suggesting this assinine senerio, only shows you know this guy Assange is guilty as sin, regarding his Conspiracy with Bradley Manning to get these documents. What an embarrassing, cowardly, way he is acting, throwing Bradley Manning under the bus, after he got those documents. He defied all warnings to not publish them for months, and with no regard to the results to Bradley Manning, posted them knowing full well, what would happen to Manning.

Assange is such a piece of crap on so many levels its pathetic, and you are desparate defending him.


It does not matter what i think, i matters what you & the u.s government can prove.


Now you are finally getting it, your opinion doesn't mean anything, and now all you have to do is realize your opinions are from not understanding Swedish laws of rape, which are different from Austrailian laws. It was very simple, all Assange had to do was behave according to Swedish laws, while is pants were down. HE FAILED!

You are also getting it about proving the case against him. Your idea of what laws were not broken means nothing, and I'm very sure you have no idea how many laws are involved, and posocutable. Just becasue the wheels of justice move slow, don't confuse a monumental case may not be brewing, or that innocence prevails. I'd bet the farm you are not that sure you would trade places with him, about the Wikileaks crimes, or the rape questions.
greeney2
 
Posts: 9595
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby bionic » Sat Jun 02, 2012 7:52 pm

Julian Assange..freedom fighter, or irresponsible scroundrel? A bit of both..it seems
Willie Wonka quotes..
What is this Wonka, some kind of funhouse?
Why? Are you having fun?
A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men.
We are the music makers, we are the dreamers of dreams
User avatar
bionic
 
Posts: 9884
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby greeney2 » Sun Jun 03, 2012 12:12 am

You just had a holiday called Memorial Day, those are Freedom Fighters Bionic. I hope you don't think Bradley Manning, is anything close to Freedom Fighter.
greeney2
 
Posts: 9595
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby rath » Sun Jun 03, 2012 12:40 am

greeney2 wrote:Now you are finally getting it, your opinion doesn't mean anything, and now all you have to do is realize your opinions are from not understanding Swedish laws of rape, which are different from Austrailian laws. It was very simple, all Assange had to do was behave according to Swedish laws, while is pants were down. HE FAILED!

You are also getting it about proving the case against him. Your idea of what laws were not broken means nothing, and I'm very sure you have no idea how many laws are involved, and posocutable. Just becasue the wheels of justice move slow, don't confuse a monumental case may not be brewing, or that innocence prevails. I'd bet the farm you are not that sure you would trade places with him, about the Wikileaks crimes, or the rape questions.


thats it thats your rebuttal. :oops:

Would you care to reply, regarding the facts of the case and the law of the case. or just keep pushing your brainwashed views.

you have so little knowledge of the facts, That you could be lead counsel for the Swedish prosecutors.

There was no rape as the sex was consensual.

Both Ardin & Wilén Text message, Tweets & on Facebook, how they are parting & having sex with Assange to their friends. Boasting of their respective conquests after the “crimes”.



& neither Arden nor Wilén complained to the police but rather “sought advice”, a technique in Sweden enabling citizens to avoid just punishment for making false complaints. They sought advice together, having collaborated and irrevocably tainted each other’s evidence beforehand. Their SMS texts to each other show a plan to contact the Swedish newspaper Expressen beforehand in order to maximise the damage to Assange.

Rape is a crime of violence, duress or deception. You can rape someone by deluding them into thinking you are someone else or by drugging them or by reason of their young age but essentially it’s a crime of violence.

But a broken condom in the middle of a sexual act does not meet the legal standard of Rape, here in Australia there in the USA or anywhere else including Sweden.

Rath wrote:In the case of Ardin it is clear that she has thrown a party in Assange’s honour at her flat after the “crime” and tweeted to her followers that she is with the “the world’s coolest smartest people, it’s amazing!”. Go on the internet and see for yourself. That Ardin has sought unsuccessfully to delete these exculpatory tweets from the public record should be a matter of grave concern. That she has published on the internet a guide on how to get revenge on cheating boyfriends ever graver.


Rath wrote:Proposed reforms of Swedish rape laws would introduce a test of whether the unequal power relations between the parties might void the sincerely expressed consent of one party. In this case, presumably, the politically active Ardin, with experience fielding gender equity complaints as a gender equity officer at Uppsala University, had her will suborned by Assange’s celebrity. The prosecutor coming as she does from a prosecution “Development Unit” could achieve this broadening of the law during Assange’s trial so he can be convicted of a crime that didn’t exist at the time he allegedly committed it. She would need to. There is no precedent for it. The Swedes are making it up as they go along.


Make no mistake: it is not Julian Assange that is on trial here but Sweden and its reputation as a modern and model country with rules of law.
Image
rath
 
Posts: 4345
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby greeney2 » Sun Jun 03, 2012 10:59 am

ONe fact is for sure, I can name 2 idiots from Austrailia who have no clue how rape laws differ in Sweden, and that any "freedom fighter" with an ounce of courage would walk into Sweden and answer the questions. If he is innocent he will walk right back out the next day. Men who are not guilty do not do what he is doing to the UK Supreme Court.

Rath you have no idea what went on behind those closed doors in Sweden. Neither to the cops in Sweden, and why this is under an investigation. Your conclusions about this and their rape laws are irrelevant and probably incorrect, definatly ignorance of other countries laws.

Rath you have no idea what transpired whatsoever between Assange and Bradley Manning, and I'm sure you would not be notified.

Rath you do not understand the complexity of federal laws regarding these documents.

Rath you can make up all the stories you want to about China and Russia, but it was Assange who negotiated and refused for weeks to turn the documents back over to the United States, and Assange who posted them anyway.
greeney2
 
Posts: 9595
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby rath » Mon Jun 04, 2012 3:28 am

greeney2 wrote:ONe fact is for sure, I can name 2 idiots from Austrailia


Always with the personal attacks when you can't make your story fit.

Facts, we want fact. What law do you say he has broken because as yet you have failed to show Assange has broken any laws at all.

Prove your case.

greeney2 wrote:Rath you have no idea what went on behind those closed doors in Sweden. Neither to the cops in Sweden, and why this is under an investigation.


Wrong ... Wrong ... Wrong...

1. i dont know what happened behind closed doors, yet i am right because the burden of proof is on you & the US government to prove beyond all reasonable doubt their case.

2. Just as i don't know all the facts Nor do you or the US government.

3. You an the USA keep claiming that the Charge against Assange, of having consensual sex after a condom broken mid coitus, has nothing to do with the USA or their desire to see Julian Assange in U.S custody.

So why are you all changing your story now. :oops:

4. Julian Assange is being sort for extradition to Sweeden to face charges of sex with a BROKEN CONDOM.
& nothing to do with the Charges relating to how Bradly manning betrayed his own country to help terrorist groups like al qaeda with their propaganda campaign, in Iraq & Afghanistan

5. You or the U.S government have thus far failed to show even the smallest of evidence, that shows Julian Assange or Bradly manning had any contact what so ever. Keeping in mind that there where/are manny other people who worked for wikkileaks, which is a web site, much like the Black Vault is.

The USA cant prove who the US traitor, Bradly Manning gave the documents to, because the documents could have been given to anybody at the wikileaks site or even another government like China or Russia, who uploaded them on their own.

The USA cant prove that Julian Assange had any involvment as all they can prove is that he was a part of the wikileaks web site.

Charging Julian Assange for Bradly Mannings Crime, would be like Charging every member of the Black Vault in the event somebody who is/was once a member of the black vault commit a crime.

(( It cant be done ))

FACTS, FACTS, FACTS.

If the USA does extradite Julian Assange, im sure a simple writ of habeas corpus, would show that the USA has no case.
Image
rath
 
Posts: 4345
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby greeney2 » Mon Jun 04, 2012 11:00 am

You keep wanting facts but keep spewing facts out of your own imagination, plus you keep confusing the USA with anything to do with Sweden extraditing him. You act like you were filming him with those women, but in actuality know NOTHING about what happened, or about questions that have not been made public. He runs because he knows there is more than a condom question.

You also keep talking like you are some sort of expert or privvy to what laws you are sure he didnt break with Manning. I have definatly named several crimes, that you ignore. Wouldn't you think if Bradley Manning was charged with 22 crimes, its complex. Evidence from his trial may inplicate him, so don't get too smug yet.

In all your bullshit ranting for facts, you fabricate your own ideas, from where, your couch? the one question you refuse to answer is why such a brave freedom fighter, and fearless Austrailain, is to cowardly to walk into Sweden, and just say the condom broke? You have no idea if he used a condom when he put his scrimp in the Barbie, or not, or what happened at all. You have one choice but to make it up as you go defending him. Your Australian standards twards women are in international question with Assange making all Austrailian men look like trash. Keep trashing those girls, while your hero runs and hides after fleeing the country, big hero.
greeney2
 
Posts: 9595
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion Topics

  • View new posts
  • View unanswered posts
  • Who is online
  • In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 10 minutes)
  • Most users ever online was 292 on Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:19 pm
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest