Rising fascism in the US

I could say that the NYT has been coming out with articles about holocausts of 6 million Jews since 1905, and some would call it fascist because it is true.

Reports from friends of Assange reveal worsening mental and physical health. I’m afraid even if he were released today, he’d never recover.

Because he revealed facts about people in power.

A journalist.

Many of those people are still in power.

Assanges treatment has without doubt been the most openly 'clandestine' hostile targeting of an individual for upsetting those in power that I've yet seen from the west:

- from the warrant to question a person for an allegation (even though they could have done it via skype, or telephone, or via statutory declaration)...not even a warrant that the country had enough evidence to arrest him...simply a warrant 'to question', I mean wtf?

- the another country enforcing such an absurd warrant

- to the 24hr guard they placed for years to 'catch a bail non-reportee' (there will be no precedent even close to this. Most, on a good day, would get half a days effort I reckon)

- to the US denying it was trying to extradite him (and later setting a sealed grand jury)

- to Britains 'we aren't doing this for the US'

....when clearly, it was a collaborative orchestration

That didn't happen.

The term rape, in this case due to the country the sex happened in, did not mean forced sex.

It boiled down to a disagreement after sex about birth control method / rubber.

And last I heard even a legit nasty rape doesn't earn years of torture and death.

But there was no rape.

I have no issue with questioning - and mentioned several ways they could achieve their goals (skype, telephone, stat dec).
He had already denied the allegations, so he wasn't going to change his tune when they asked questions (and even so, they could do this via skype/telephone).

This means, unless they had sufficient evidence to charge him, there was no valid reason to issue the warrant "for questioning".

It is telling that Sweden eventually dropped the investigation (ie. they didn't have enough to charge him)

I have an issue with this being used, not for the purpose it supposedly is stated for, but as the first link in a chain to bring a person before a different countries court, on different charges (through yet another intermediary western country).

Quibbling over the method of questioning seems silly to me.

The charges were dropped because he successfully evaded justice until the statute of limitations ran out on his charges

On 12 August 2015, Swedish prosecutors announced that, as the statute of limitations for the less serious allegations had run out, and they had not succeeded in interviewing Assange, they would end part of their preliminary investigation.

Deputy Director of Public Prosecution Eva-Marie Persson took the decision to "discontinue the investigation regarding Julian Assange", the Swedish Prosecution Authority said.

"The reason for this decision is that the evidence has weakened considerably due to the long period of time that has elapsed since the events in question," it added.

Brendan, I’m going to have to put you on the permanent kybosh for that filthy business.

Please stop hating humanity, but do that elsewhere.

Padre Hijo y el Espiritu Santo

I couldn't agree more - so there was no need for them to issue a warrant 'for questioning' (you do realise he was happy to talk via phone or skype or similar, right)

The more serious allegations kept going, until Sweden admitted it didn't have enough evidence.

I couldn't agree more - so there was no need for them to issue a warrant 'for questioning' (you do realise he was happy to talk via phone or skype or similar, right)

If you agree that quibbling over their method of questioning is silly, then why are you quibbling over their method of questioning??

That long passage of time was of course due to the fact that Assange successfully evaded justice for so many years.

Swedish prosecutors have offered to travel to London to question Wikileaks founder Julian Assange over sex assault allegations.

Prosecutors had previously insisted on questioning Mr Assange in Sweden, after seeking his arrest in 2010.

Mr Assange denies the assault claims and has been living at the Ecuadorean embassy in London since 2012.

He fears that if he is sent to Sweden he could then be extradited to the US to face charges over leaking material.

A lawyer for Mr Assange, Per Samuelson, welcomed the move. "He is willing to co-operate fully now in conducting this interrogation - this is a great victory for him," he told the BBC World Service.

“We have requested this interview repeatedly since 2010,” said Per Samuelsson. “Julian Assange has always wanted to tell his version to the Swedish police. He wants a chance to clear his name. We hope the investigation will be closed then.”

You've already said we shouldn't quibble over the method of questioning, so you should have no issue with Sweden doing it this way...but they didn't want to, and that is the only thing that stalled their case.

You agreed with this sentiment - that quibbling over the pathway for questioning is silly, yet you keep arguing as if the warrant was needed to question him (as that is what the warrant was issued for - only to question him)

At the end of the day, the DNA won't change, the complaints versions wont change (they will have been captured early on)...so what can possibly change in the evidence? Nothing really.

And we know they didnt have enough evidence to arrest him because it would have been a arrest warrant to face charges, rather than one to face questioning.

I'm not generally one for conspiracies, but I've no doubt in the world that this was one.

We actually don't know that. You are making an assumption.

At this point in time, after several times where you read just want you wanted to read into my posts, and this latest post - it has become clear that you want to hear & see what you want to hear and see.