4 ms·

the Assange thing also reeks of US/UK joint government interference. Its totally possible that he’s a massive rapist, and its a great cover to be a known enemy

by dijit 3y ago

the Assange thing also reeks of US/UK joint government interference. Its totally possible that he’s a massive rapist, and its a great cover to be a known enemy to governments with your journalistic endeavours. But its terribly convenient for the US government that the circumstances landed where they did, and it was even told to us that it would land this way and those saying it were branded as conspiracy theorists. One might consider that Snowden went in knowing exactly what was possible, came prepared was completely “clean”, additionally he has not had a particularly difficult living situation. Yet even he is able to get massacred by certain sections of the media. Assange is living in (self-imposed, sure) exile and doesnt have the luxury of maintaining a lifestyle that promotes mental well-being, and the media are very quick to jump on his transgressions and blow them to insane proportions. Please keep that in mind when talking about him.

ben_w 3y ago
Given what happened in Sweden when he was kicked out of the Ecuadorian embassy and the UK arrested him for extradition to the US, I believe the Swedish accusations were made, and the prosecutions were done, in good faith. Assange's argument against going to Sweden should've logically also applied to the UK, where he physically was while trying to make the argument to avoid extradition to Sweden, as demonstrated by the UK not even bothering to inform the Swedish authorities when they finally did arrest Assange.
- nobody9999 3y ago
  >Given what happened in Sweden when he was kicked out of the Ecuadorian embassy and the UK arrested him for extradition to the US, I believe the Swedish accusations were made, and the prosecutions were done, in good faith. Just picking a nit here, but IIRC Assange was not arrested by UK authorities to be extradited to the US (that's just a "bonus" for the US), but because he broke UK law by "jumping bail,"[0] which is a crime in the UK. There are a raft of other details/issues around Assange and his Swedish/British/Ecuadorian odyssey, and those have been endlessly discusssed/litigated in the press. I won't address those issues, as I don't think it would add productively to this discussion. Assange did violate the terms of his bail in the UK and was convicted and sentenced accordingly, regardless of other issues. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bail_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bail_in_the_United_Kingdom Edit: Clarified my thoughts.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    > Just picking a nit here, but IIRC Assange was not arrested by UK authorities to be extradited to the US Ok, fair. My recollection was that they did both at about the same time, though subsequent focus on the (clearly motivated) US extradition rather overshadow the Swedish issues (which don't look politically motivated to me; though obviously that's what they want me to think :P). That the UK didn't bother to tell Sweden is even more egregious given what you say.
    - depressedpanda 3y ago
      Why would the UK inform Sweden? The suspiciously flimsy case had been dropped already.
- stefantalpalaru 3y ago
  [dead]
zirgs 3y ago
Assange is incoherent. Why would Sweden frame him for a rape that he didn't commit? Why would the USA need to get him extradited through Sweden if the UK can extradite him to the USA directly without any sort of fake criminal charges? Also why the hell did he go to the Ecuadorian embassy without an exit plan? He has spent more than 10 years in prison and self-imprisonment. And for what? That helicopter combat footage? Is that it? Sure - it doesn't look good, but...that's Tuesday for the Russians in Ukraine.
- cbsmith 3y ago
  > Assange is incoherent. Why would Sweden frame him for a rape that he didn't commit? He wasn't incoherent when the charges were filed.
- atlantic 3y ago
  At the time, the UK couldn't just arrest him at the behest of the US, for exposing state crimes such as torture and extra-judicial killing. He was a popular and respected figure, so public opinion wouldn't allow it. The rape charges served to smear his reputation and erode public support. Now they can do what they want with him.
- boomboomsubban 3y ago
  >Why would the USA need to get him extradited through Sweden if the UK can extradite him to the USA directly without any sort of fake criminal charges? Currently the extradition of Assange has been refused on humanitarian grounds, as the US can't guarantee that they won't stick him in an ultramax facility and/or drive him to suicide. It's still facing appeal, but it's entirely possible the UK refuses to extradite. I believe historically Sweden has been more willing to ignore such concerns when dealing with the US, which is why there would have been an incentive to fake charges that could get him moved to Swedish custody.
  - toyg 3y ago
    > It's still facing appeal, but it's entirely possible the UK refuses to extradite. Extradition has actually been approved by all relevant UK authorities, after formal reassurance from the US about his treatment. Assange is appealing that decision, arguing then-Home Secretary Priti Patel was an id-- could not seriously accept some meaningless words that they can renege a minute after getting him. Meanwhile, the Australian government is trying to vaguely save face by making some noise, probably to extract some extra money from Biden to just shut up.
mcculley 3y ago
> Its totally possible that he’s a massive rapist I do not remember him being alleged to be a massive rapist. Certainly, one charge of any kind of rape should be enough to have him brought to the jurisdiction where the charge is made.
- willcipriano 3y ago
  > Certainly, one charge of any kind of rape should be enough to have him brought to the jurisdiction where the charge is made. It wasn't for any of Epsteins clients.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
  The person who approached Swedish police never claimed rape. She was worried that he may have had HIV and didn't use a condom and wanted to know if she had any legal recourse to force him to undergo an HIV test. Her testimony was changed after the fact by Swedish police without her knowledge or consent.
- atlantic 3y ago
  He's not even accused of rape. Once he was safely in jail awaiting extradition, Swedish prosecutors dropped all charges.
toyg 3y ago
> Assange is living in (self-imposed, sure) exile This is the first time I've ever seen anyone defining "being in prison" as "self-imposed exile". Assange has been in an English prison for 4 years now. The only thing for which he was actually convicted (skipping bail during extradition proceedings) accounts for only 1 of those.
- cdchn 3y ago
  People who are awaiting trail or extradition are typically held during that process if they're considered a flight risk, which I think that's been shown to be a real risk since he was convicted for that.
  - wddkcs 3y ago
    It's insane to see the level of malice directed at Passage and say anything being done to him is justified. I can only see the mottled opinion of him here as the effect of successful smearing.
  - roenxi 3y ago
    > People who are awaiting trail or extradition... My information is a few years out of date but I've been assured that at least he is only being extradited to Sweden for wild sex crimes and not the United States! Now let me check the Wikipedia arti... oh, turns out he is being extradited to the United States. A lot of people didn't see that coming (never really understood why not, but that is people for you). The situation is in this awkward position where there was an obvious conspiracy to get Assange and making predictions on the assumption of a conspiracy has had great predictive power. The only change is it is isn't a conspiracy any more because everything is playing out publicly in British courts. So while Assange is certainly being subjected to a lot of usual processes, the usual processes are being turned on him because he embarrassed the US government by bringing its activities to light. I have no doubt that is illegal. If I was a government, I too would want to criminalise people trying to hold me accountable. The issue is that punishing people for encouraging transparency is an inescapably political act. And Assange is on the right side of history on this one. It is easy to see him as a footnote in every textbook one day as "and this was the moment when people started to find out what was going on".
bawolff 3y ago
> Its totally possible that he’s a massive rapist, and its a great cover to be a known enemy to governments with your journalistic endeavours. > But its terribly convenient for the US government that the circumstances landed where they did, and it was even told to us that it would land this way and those saying it were branded as conspiracy theorists. I wonder if its both. He could be a massive rapist who would have gone unnoticed without us gov involvement. I imagine if you want to discredit someone it is much easier to find their real sins than to make something up wholesale. Of course if that's true it still doesn't really matter how it was dragged to the light, he would still be a dirt bag.
- dijit 3y ago
  I agree. the best lies are coatings around a grain of truth.
fortuna86 3y ago
[dead]

by dijit 3y ago

ben_w 3y ago

Given what happened in Sweden when he was kicked out of the Ecuadorian embassy and the UK arrested him for extradition to the US, I believe the Swedish accusations were made, and the prosecutions were done, in good faith. Assange's argument against going to Sweden should've logically also applied to the UK, where he physically was while trying to make the argument to avoid extradition to Sweden, as demonstrated by the UK not even bothering to inform the Swedish authorities when they finally did arrest Assange.

nobody9999 3y ago
>Given what happened in Sweden when he was kicked out of the Ecuadorian embassy and the UK arrested him for extradition to the US, I believe the Swedish accusations were made, and the prosecutions were done, in good faith. Just picking a nit here, but IIRC Assange was not arrested by UK authorities to be extradited to the US (that's just a "bonus" for the US), but because he broke UK law by "jumping bail,"[0] which is a crime in the UK. There are a raft of other details/issues around Assange and his Swedish/British/Ecuadorian odyssey, and those have been endlessly discusssed/litigated in the press. I won't address those issues, as I don't think it would add productively to this discussion. Assange did violate the terms of his bail in the UK and was convicted and sentenced accordingly, regardless of other issues. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bail_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bail_in_the_United_Kingdom Edit: Clarified my thoughts.
- ben_w 3y ago
  > Just picking a nit here, but IIRC Assange was not arrested by UK authorities to be extradited to the US Ok, fair. My recollection was that they did both at about the same time, though subsequent focus on the (clearly motivated) US extradition rather overshadow the Swedish issues (which don't look politically motivated to me; though obviously that's what they want me to think :P). That the UK didn't bother to tell Sweden is even more egregious given what you say.
  - depressedpanda 3y ago
    Why would the UK inform Sweden? The suspiciously flimsy case had been dropped already.
stefantalpalaru 3y ago
[dead]

zirgs 3y ago

Assange is incoherent. Why would Sweden frame him for a rape that he didn't commit? Why would the USA need to get him extradited through Sweden if the UK can extradite him to the USA directly without any sort of fake criminal charges? Also why the hell did he go to the Ecuadorian embassy without an exit plan? He has spent more than 10 years in prison and self-imprisonment. And for what? That helicopter combat footage? Is that it? Sure - it doesn't look good, but...that's Tuesday for the Russians in Ukraine.

cbsmith 3y ago
> Assange is incoherent. Why would Sweden frame him for a rape that he didn't commit? He wasn't incoherent when the charges were filed.
atlantic 3y ago
At the time, the UK couldn't just arrest him at the behest of the US, for exposing state crimes such as torture and extra-judicial killing. He was a popular and respected figure, so public opinion wouldn't allow it. The rape charges served to smear his reputation and erode public support. Now they can do what they want with him.
boomboomsubban 3y ago
>Why would the USA need to get him extradited through Sweden if the UK can extradite him to the USA directly without any sort of fake criminal charges? Currently the extradition of Assange has been refused on humanitarian grounds, as the US can't guarantee that they won't stick him in an ultramax facility and/or drive him to suicide. It's still facing appeal, but it's entirely possible the UK refuses to extradite. I believe historically Sweden has been more willing to ignore such concerns when dealing with the US, which is why there would have been an incentive to fake charges that could get him moved to Swedish custody.
- toyg 3y ago
  > It's still facing appeal, but it's entirely possible the UK refuses to extradite. Extradition has actually been approved by all relevant UK authorities, after formal reassurance from the US about his treatment. Assange is appealing that decision, arguing then-Home Secretary Priti Patel was an id-- could not seriously accept some meaningless words that they can renege a minute after getting him. Meanwhile, the Australian government is trying to vaguely save face by making some noise, probably to extract some extra money from Biden to just shut up.

mcculley 3y ago

> Its totally possible that he’s a massive rapist I do not remember him being alleged to be a massive rapist. Certainly, one charge of any kind of rape should be enough to have him brought to the jurisdiction where the charge is made.

willcipriano 3y ago
> Certainly, one charge of any kind of rape should be enough to have him brought to the jurisdiction where the charge is made. It wasn't for any of Epsteins clients.
lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
The person who approached Swedish police never claimed rape. She was worried that he may have had HIV and didn't use a condom and wanted to know if she had any legal recourse to force him to undergo an HIV test. Her testimony was changed after the fact by Swedish police without her knowledge or consent.
atlantic 3y ago
He's not even accused of rape. Once he was safely in jail awaiting extradition, Swedish prosecutors dropped all charges.

toyg 3y ago

> Assange is living in (self-imposed, sure) exile This is the first time I've ever seen anyone defining "being in prison" as "self-imposed exile". Assange has been in an English prison for 4 years now. The only thing for which he was actually convicted (skipping bail during extradition proceedings) accounts for only 1 of those.

cdchn 3y ago
People who are awaiting trail or extradition are typically held during that process if they're considered a flight risk, which I think that's been shown to be a real risk since he was convicted for that.
- wddkcs 3y ago
  It's insane to see the level of malice directed at Passage and say anything being done to him is justified. I can only see the mottled opinion of him here as the effect of successful smearing.
- roenxi 3y ago
  > People who are awaiting trail or extradition... My information is a few years out of date but I've been assured that at least he is only being extradited to Sweden for wild sex crimes and not the United States! Now let me check the Wikipedia arti... oh, turns out he is being extradited to the United States. A lot of people didn't see that coming (never really understood why not, but that is people for you). The situation is in this awkward position where there was an obvious conspiracy to get Assange and making predictions on the assumption of a conspiracy has had great predictive power. The only change is it is isn't a conspiracy any more because everything is playing out publicly in British courts. So while Assange is certainly being subjected to a lot of usual processes, the usual processes are being turned on him because he embarrassed the US government by bringing its activities to light. I have no doubt that is illegal. If I was a government, I too would want to criminalise people trying to hold me accountable. The issue is that punishing people for encouraging transparency is an inescapably political act. And Assange is on the right side of history on this one. It is easy to see him as a footnote in every textbook one day as "and this was the moment when people started to find out what was going on".

bawolff 3y ago

> Its totally possible that he’s a massive rapist, and its a great cover to be a known enemy to governments with your journalistic endeavours. > But its terribly convenient for the US government that the circumstances landed where they did, and it was even told to us that it would land this way and those saying it were branded as conspiracy theorists. I wonder if its both. He could be a massive rapist who would have gone unnoticed without us gov involvement. I imagine if you want to discredit someone it is much easier to find their real sins than to make something up wholesale. Of course if that's true it still doesn't really matter how it was dragged to the light, he would still be a dirt bag.

dijit 3y ago
I agree. the best lies are coatings around a grain of truth.

fortuna86 3y ago

[dead]