M.Dancer Posted December 1, 2010 Report Share Posted December 1, 2010 (edited) Again, I thought being part of Al-Queda (a terrorist organization) was enough. Are you defending terrorists now? (See how that works?) Prove they knew he was a member of al q in 2001. No this shows that a sex offender (to you) is more important than a real terrorist who actually has committed terrorism on 3 different occasions. I think the above proves you are a muttering idiot. Be so kind to show where I have ranked the two in importance... What you deem as a priority is nothing but a sideshow to a bigger issue which you and I have yet to understand. Be so kind to show where I said it was a priority...if you can. Everybody Dancer now !!!! Friends don't give friends fruitcakes.... Edited December 1, 2010 by M.Dancer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted December 2, 2010 Report Share Posted December 2, 2010 Far more likley he will be extradited to Sweden to face rape charges or perhaps charged in Australia if he ever returns that facing treason charges called for in editorials of imaginary major american newspapers... Now that doesn't mean that wiki leaks or the leakers will never be charged with a crime in the US...treason it won't be....more likely espionage. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1334160/U-S-launch-criminal-investigation-WikiLeaks-dossier-Hillary-Clinton-describes-attack-international-community.html Is it treason when one stands up and say that we have problems internationally because our system is run by liars? To harm the Wikileak guy is like offing the kid that states "the king has no clothes". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted December 3, 2010 Report Share Posted December 3, 2010 Well well well..finally the internet has become useful..sure took a long time...It is a wonderful thing that now everybody in supposedly democractic societies can sit down and look at the secrets...It's not really a democracy if one can not view it...The hiding or occultism that has been under the guise of democracy seems to be fading fast. Demonocracy is getting the boot...Merry Chistmas everybody - Judgement day came sooner than expected...Do not judge least ye be willing to be judged...for those that are innocent being judged is not a problem - for the vile rats it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 3, 2010 Report Share Posted December 3, 2010 those nasty charges against Julian Assange...one, having sex without a condom the other having sex with a broken condom ...the sex was consensual no one accused him of rape, the penalty for sex without a condom is $715... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 3, 2010 Report Share Posted December 3, 2010 those nasty charges against Julian Assange...one, having sex without a condom the other having sex with a broken condom ...the sex was consensual no one accused him of rape, the penalty for sex without a condom is $715... Do you have a link for that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 3, 2010 Report Share Posted December 3, 2010 (edited) Do you have a link for that? sex without a condom , defined as "sex by surprise" in Sweden... Edited December 3, 2010 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 3, 2010 Report Share Posted December 3, 2010 sex without a condom , defined as "sex by surprise" in Sweden... Outrageous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted December 3, 2010 Report Share Posted December 3, 2010 those nasty charges against Julian Assange...one, having sex without a condom the other having sex with a broken condom ...the sex was consensual no one accused him of rape, the penalty for sex without a condom is $715... A detailed, chronological account of the women’s alleged encounters with Assange—which in both cases began with consensual sexual contact but later included what the women claimed was nonconsensual sex Non consensual sex? Are you guys trying to minimize his sex crimes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 3, 2010 Report Share Posted December 3, 2010 (edited) Non consensual sex? Are you guys trying to minimize his sex crimes? Well, this one account suggests that the sex became "non consenual" to her when the condom broke. I still want to know more. Did he actually use any violence or physical force? Maybe he did... I dunno. Are you guys trying to minimize his sex crimes? I dont consider someting quilty of a crime until theres a conviction, and its not even clear at this point what the charges are. The pitch-fork looks good on ya Morris. Way to go. Edited December 3, 2010 by dre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted December 3, 2010 Report Share Posted December 3, 2010 (edited) Non consensual sex? Are you guys trying to minimize his sex crimes? The account I read,from the Prosecutors office in Sweden, suggests there wasnt a crime except for some bizarre law on the books from 1917 or some such having to do w a ripped condom. In fact one or both of the women went out shopping for breakfast supplies for her and Assange.If true, that seems quite bizarre for someone that has been sexually assaulted the night before. Seems highly dubious that any 'crime' was commited. Edited December 3, 2010 by guyser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted December 3, 2010 Report Share Posted December 3, 2010 In fact one or both of the women went out shopping for breakfast supplies for her and Assange.If true, that seems quite bizarre for someone that has been sexually assaulted the night before. That's a fact that would be considered irrelevant in court in Canada. Often date rapes are reported much later, often once the perpetrator is no longer near to intimidate her. Non censensual sex is clearly a crime....trying to make it sound silly is surely a tactic worthy of the PR compamies... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 3, 2010 Report Share Posted December 3, 2010 The account I read,from the Prosecutors office in Sweden, suggests there wasnt a crime except for some bizarre law on the books from 1917 or some such having to do w a ripped condom. In fact one or both of the women went out shopping for breakfast supplies for her and Assange.If true, that seems quite bizarre for someone that has been sexually assaulted the night before. Seems highly dubious that any 'crime' was commited. Morris would gladly string this guy up for ANY reason. He's opposed the government by daring to not help them keep their secrets (like journalists have for decades), and Morris is POT COMMITED to his defense of the US government. Therefore WikiLeaks = Evil. Was there any peep from these guys when it was Chinese secrets WikiLeaks was releasing? Nope, not a word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted December 3, 2010 Report Share Posted December 3, 2010 (edited) That's a fact that would be considered irrelevant in court in Canada. Often date rapes are reported much later, often once the perpetrator is no longer near to intimidate her. Yes, that is true. But they were alone and returned to hiom. Either way, no basis for exhoneration on this point. Non censensual sex is clearly a crime....trying to make it sound silly is surely a tactic worthy of the PR compamies... Let me find the link and post it. Apparently both women have said consensual, but the law I referenced was brought out and used. Lets try this one from the San Fran Chronicle.. " The "sex charges" against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange that have now led to an international manhunt have always seemed, if not suspect, lame. Basically, it seemed as though two Swedish Assange groupies that Assange charmed into the sack in rapid succession were mortified to discover that he actually wasn't that into them. But then Interpol launched its manhunt, rendering Assange a cross-border fugitive. So it seemed the "sex charges" might be more serious than initially thought. But what are they? They're not "rape," everyone agrees--because the sex was consensual. They also aren't unspecified "molestation." What they appear to be is a violation of a Swedish law against "having sex without a condom." Interestingly, even that charge doesn't appear to precisely apply in this case. A condom was apparently used--initially. But it broke. So the dispute is about whether it broke "accidentally" (he said) or it broke "on purpose" (she said). That DEFINITELY sounds like a job for Interpol. Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/12/03/businessinsider-julian-assange-sex-crimes-2010-12.DTL#ixzz175sq1PS7 Edited December 3, 2010 by guyser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted December 4, 2010 Report Share Posted December 4, 2010 (edited) sex without a condom , defined as "sex by surprise" in Sweden... Sex by Surprise??? I'm sorry,that's so pathetic it's funny... It's also funny(not in a ha ha way),when "The Establishment" gets rattled,they try to smear someone's character by trying to link them with a sex scandal... That seems almost right on cue... Then we have this bonehead Harper supporter in Calgary basically calling for Assange's assassination... Edited December 4, 2010 by Jack Weber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted December 4, 2010 Report Share Posted December 4, 2010 Ever try to stop when the condom breaks just as you are about to hit the peak? Not the easiest thing to do. That happened to me back in high school with a girlfriend. We were both a little nervous after that hoping she would not get pregnant, and we avoided that bullet. We were much more careful after that. However the fact that he is not charged with anything related to the leaked documents themselves means that this is just a desperate way to bring him in. It's a farce in which people are buying into. Why rape? Why not possession of stolen US government property? And why has that not been the charge when the first batch of leaked documents came out? OHHHH that is right .. they charged THIS guy for the leaks. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38499161/ns/us_news-security/ Now this guy was charged back in August of this year, and I think has been in custody in one way or another since then. Did he manage to get all the documents to Assange before his detainment? Or were there new leaked documents AFTER he was arrested and charged? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted December 4, 2010 Report Share Posted December 4, 2010 Sex by Surprise??? I'm sorry,that's so pathetic it's funny... It's also funny(not in a ha ha way),when "The Establishment" gets rattled,they try to smear someone's character by trying to link them with a sex scandal... That seems almost right on cue... Then we have this bonehead Harper supporter in Calgary basically calling for Assange's assassination... The sex scandal card seems to fit the pattern and stamp of a near Victorian-like authority worship. It's as outdated a blast from the past as the notion of these so-called diplomatic cables. Every time I hear the term cables I get this image of information making its way up the chain of authority starting with some dispatch from the colonies that was received via Morse code. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted December 7, 2010 Report Share Posted December 7, 2010 those nasty charges against Julian Assange...one, having sex without a condom the other having sex with a broken condom ...the sex was consensual no one accused him of rape, the penalty for sex without a condom is $715... I as have stated in the corresponding thread..reguarding this issue - is but one question if this is even remotely a real crimminal act...who approached the woman and who gleened this very personal information? I would bet a million bucks that some ratish investigators were sent out to dig up anything they can about Assange! What is scarey is that if the Americans get a hold of him they will hold him for 30 years...because he embarrassed them...The world might say that he "endangered" people..but the reality is that the expose` - He granted courage to those that were systemically frightened and weakend by their own paniced and cowardly governments - It is OUR authroities that grant terrorists power by TELLING us to be terrorized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted December 7, 2010 Report Share Posted December 7, 2010 Yes, that is true. But they were alone and returned to hiom. Either way, no basis for exhoneration on this point. Let me find the link and post it. Apparently both women have said consensual, but the law I referenced was brought out and used. Lets try this one from the San Fran Chronicle.. " The "sex charges" against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange that have now led to an international manhunt have always seemed, if not suspect, lame. Basically, it seemed as though two Swedish Assange groupies that Assange charmed into the sack in rapid succession were mortified to discover that he actually wasn't that into them. But then Interpol launched its manhunt, rendering Assange a cross-border fugitive. So it seemed the "sex charges" might be more serious than initially thought. But what are they? They're not "rape," everyone agrees--because the sex was consensual. They also aren't unspecified "molestation." What they appear to be is a violation of a Swedish law against "having sex without a condom." Interestingly, even that charge doesn't appear to precisely apply in this case. A condom was apparently used--initially. But it broke. So the dispute is about whether it broke "accidentally" (he said) or it broke "on purpose" (she said). That DEFINITELY sounds like a job for Interpol. Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/12/03/businessinsider-julian-assange-sex-crimes-2010-12.DTL#ixzz175sq1PS7 The charges have become a little more specific.... Coupled with his threat that if he were to be treated like a normal human, he would retaliate with a wikileak bomb..it sounds more and more he is simply a run of the mill sociopath... Women A: The first three charges related to a woman described as Miss A: “unlawful coercion,” for allegedly holding down the complainant’s arms and legs; “sexual molestation,” for allegedly not using a condom; and “deliberate molestation” in a way “designed to violate her sexual integrity.” Women B: It was also alleged that Mr. Assange did not use a condom in a sexual encounter with another woman, named as Miss W., and “improperly exploited the fact that she was asleep.” Even when reference was made to his “naked, erect penis,” Mr. Assange looked calmly ahead. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/europe/julian-assange-faces-judge-as-wikileaks-supporters-flock-to-court/article1827668/ Sounds like date rape....and initiating sex while the secong women slept. I think most women would, if not thinking he is a predator, feel he is a tad creepy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted December 7, 2010 Report Share Posted December 7, 2010 The charges have become a little more specific.... Coupled with his threat that if he were to be treated like a normal human, he would retaliate with a wikileak bomb..it sounds more and more he is simply a run of the mill sociopath... Women A: Women B: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/europe/julian-assange-faces-judge-as-wikileaks-supporters-flock-to-court/article1827668/ Sounds like date rape....and initiating sex while the secong women slept. I think most women would, if not thinking he is a predator, feel he is a tad creepy. So he is immature sexually and is a tad creepy - have you ever listened to John Tory's radio show? There is a pretty constant flow of crude and immature sexual commentary - equal to that of a 13 year old English school boy.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted December 7, 2010 Report Share Posted December 7, 2010 It would be just if the other 267 million woman who are victims of sex by surprise stepped forward...wonder how many there really are that might scream - No...you can not do that - but you can do that. Have sexual acts in the very not so liberal Europe been put on an offical government menu of does and do not and maybe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.