Happy Face 29 Posted August 21, 2013 Author Share Posted August 21, 2013 If he believes he has done nothing wrong he can always leave the embassy? So asylum is never warranted in your opinion? Everyone in the world can be confident of a fair trial on any crime they're accused of and non-politicisation of their 'crimes'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desmondTUTU 0 Posted August 21, 2013 Share Posted August 21, 2013 It's up to him if he wants to seek asylum. Everybody is entitled to legal representation - as im sure he could afford. If he is guilty of crimes he may as well have a trial and start his sentence. Doesn't look such a smart arse any more does he. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26955 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 So asylum is never warranted in your opinion? Everyone in the world can be confident of a fair trial on any crime they're accused of and non-politicisation of their 'crimes'? Aspects of his detention aside, do you believe that Manning had a fair trial? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 22, 2013 Author Share Posted August 22, 2013 Of course he didn't. 2 years ago the commander in chief decreed that Manning had broken the law... http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/53601.html When the leader of the military leads a tribunal to assumptions like that it's totally at odds with the claims in the US of innocence until guilt is proven. It was a Nixonian level of overreach. Then when it came to the actual trial very little of Mannings motivation was deemed admissable. What has been called his 'defense' was therefore nothing of the sort. He was not allowed to defend himself as a whistleblower. It was deemed irrelevant by the judge that he was exposing war crimes or that attempts to raise these issues up the chain have command fell on deaf ears, also irrelevant that there is no evidence that anyone came to any harm as a result of the leak, despite the ample prosecution claims that the reason for a harsh punishment is the potential harm done. The judge, rather than his lawyer, was most pivotal in framing Manning's defense. He was told he could only argue that he didn't know al-qaeda would see the information he released...which is a ridiculous notion for a worldwide leak splashed on every front page. http://www.dailypaul.com/270726/military-judge-rules-mannings-motive-mostly-inadmisable-in-wikileaks-case Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Thought Obama signed whistleblower protection act or summink.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 22, 2013 Author Share Posted August 22, 2013 He made a pretty speech about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 35874 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Manning has just announced he wishes to live the rest of his life as a woman and begin hormone therapy immediately. What's this move all about, the day after you get sentenced to 35 years in prison? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 14166 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Gender identity issues were a cornerstone of his defence, so I suppose it's the logical next step. Timing's a bit odd, but then I suppose if you're going to live the rest of your useful adult life in jail, you might as well do it as the right gender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Manning 1 Obomber 0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desmondTUTU 0 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Thought Obama signed whistleblower protection act or summink.. There's a clear difference between whistle blowing and releasing classified secrets. seriously ffs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 23, 2013 Author Share Posted August 23, 2013 There's a clear difference between whistle blowing and releasing classified secrets. seriously ffs When the government classify EVERYTHING then that's why it needs a whistle blower. How would it be whistleblowing to leak information already in the public domain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 Tutu is working class. This stuff goes over his head probably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 23, 2013 Author Share Posted August 23, 2013 They could pull the cops away then, considering he's not a violent criminal and it's an entirely political decision to apply that sort of pressure on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 23, 2013 Author Share Posted August 23, 2013 he's being accused of rape/sexual assault or harrasment, i'd consider those violent crimes. he's a cowardly little git hiding away from his sexual harrassment charges, shitting his pants incase he gets extradited to the u.s, made only more laughable by the fact it's in an ecudorian embassay considering his stance on freedom of expression/speech/knowledge. Loathe as i am to have the conversation another time, it was consensual sex. The accusation is that he didn't wear a condom. Both complainants approached the police later only to request Assange be made to take an STD test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaddockLad 14963 Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 Loathe as i am to have the conversation another time, it was consensual sex. The accusation is that he didn't wear a condom. Both complainants approached the police later only to request Assange be made to take an STD test. So its illegal in Sweden for man not to wear a condom? Thats fucked up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 35874 Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 Didn't he shag her once with a condom on, and then she woke up to find him piling into her without one? I mean at the very least that's quite weird. Anyway, I'm all for stuff like wikileaks getting info into the public domain, given the shady untrustworthy cunts that are trying to keep the secrets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 23, 2013 Author Share Posted August 23, 2013 Didn't he shag her once with a condom on, and then she woke up to find him piling into her without one? I mean at the very least that's quite weird. Anyway, I'm all for stuff like wikileaks getting info into the public domain, given the shady untrustworthy cunts that are trying to keep the secrets. Aye, if true it's a pretty vile thing to do. The characterisation of him as a violent rapist isn't right though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 So its illegal in Sweden for man not to wear a condom? Thats fucked up. The country is run by lesbians basically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 if she was out for the count he's stil a rapist like You should look into her background a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 23, 2013 Author Share Posted August 23, 2013 if she was out for the count he's stil a rapist like He never drugged the lass and took advantage. They were sleeping after having had sex. Millions of people around the world wake up after a post coital snooze and go in for seconds. He WAS a cunt for doing it without a blob on though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 35874 Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 I'm not having that as rape. It's weird and as said, he's an arsehole for not wrapping up, but it's not rape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 23, 2013 Author Share Posted August 23, 2013 he's still a horrible hypocritical little coward at any rate, and wierd looking don't forget that In comparison to the massive courage of Manning or Snowden, I agree he looks a little cowardly. But in comparison to the average fucker like me who sits on his arse complaining about crimes of government, but doing nowt, he's braver than any of us. He's given his whole life up to the Wikileaks project. A part of me does want him to go to Sweden and face the questions they want to ask, as he could either : 1) be released without charge and be free to do as he pleases 2) be charged and have his name tarnished 3) be extradited to the US jailed indefinitely, potentially tortured and who knows what charges he would face, if any. 4) be disappeared A couple of those options would shine such a light on US misdeeds it would be an incredible act of bravery to fall on his sword. A couple of others less so, but would get him past this ridiculous state of limbo. I can see why he personally is not brave enough to risk the 3 out of 4 bad outcomes in the slim hope of getting the one good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 35874 Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 Nope. That's why I've said that at best it's weird. It isn't rape though. As for hypocrisy, you don't get to pick and choose your friends when you're in his situation. It's about self preservation, we'd all do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 (edited) In comparison to the massive courage of Manning or Snowden, I agree he looks a little cowardly. But in comparison to the average fucker like me who sits on his arse complaining about crimes of government, but doing nowt, he's braver than any of us. He's given his whole life up to the Wikileaks project. A part of me does want him to go to Sweden and face the questions they want to ask, as he could either : 1) be released without charge and be free to do as he pleases 2) be charged and have his name tarnished 3) be extradited to the US jailed indefinitely, potentially tortured and who knows what charges he would face, if any. 4) be disappeared A couple of those options would shine such a light on US misdeeds it would be an incredible act of bravery to fall on his sword. A couple of others less so, but would get him past this ridiculous state of limbo. I can see why he personally is not brave enough to risk the 3 out of 4 bad outcomes in the slim hope of getting the one good one. Reckon he'd be in American before his feet touched the ground in Sweden. Edited August 23, 2013 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 18173 Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 He never drugged the lass and took advantage. They were sleeping after having had sex. Millions of people around the world wake up after a post coital snooze and go in for seconds. He WAS a cunt for doing it without a blob on though. Had on, it would have been ok if he put a condom on? Fuck off, sleeping with an unconscious lass IS definitely rape in my book, putting a condom on makes it clear it's pre-emptive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now