RayC

4 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

So he is claiming he thinks Corbyn is not an anti semite. That does not mean he supports him, neither does it make me a corbynite as claimed.

 

See text below. Does that convince you that Feinstein is a Corbynite? Still offering your support to Andrew?

"In December 2019, along with 42 other leading cultural figures, Feinstein signed a letter endorsing the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn's leadership in the 2019 general election. The letter stated that "Labour's election manifesto under Jeremy Corbyn's leadership offers a transformative plan that prioritises the needs of people and the planet over private profit and the vested interests of a few." (Source: Wikipedia)

12 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Not sure how you reached that conclusion 😃.

Feinstein is a Corbyn supporter. You wished Feinstein 'Good luck' in his campaign to become a MP. Therefore, I'd argue that it's not unreasonable to assume that you share Feinstein's views which are in line with Corbyn's.😉

7 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Good luck Andrew.

 

Jews will have a terrible time under the antisemitic Labour mob. I wish you all the best. 

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I don't care who does it as long as Starmer doesn't get to be PM. Good luck to Andrew.

You two have suddenly converted into hard left Corbynists.

Have to admit that I didn't see that one coming.

32 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

Let's dance!

 

Have you heard it on the news?
About this fascist groove thang?
Evil men with racist views
Spreading all across the land

Don't just sit there on your ass
Unlock that funky chaindance
Brothers, sisters shoot your best
We don't need this fascist groove thang

 

History will repeat itself
Crisis point we're near the hour
Counterforce will do no good
Hot you ass I feel your power

Hitler proves that funky stuff
Is not for you and me girl
Europe's an unhappy land
They've had their fascist groove thang

That tune brought back some memories (mainly good). Thanks for posting👍

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s a alt-right political grouping within the elected representatives.

 

They’re obviously having a ‘haters tiff’.

 

Nothing at all to do with ‘Democracy’ 

More than a tiff by the sound of things. AfD too extreme even for the likes of France's NF and Belgium's Vlaams Belang. Tells you all you need to know.

48 minutes ago, SpaceKadet said:

Oh yes, The Guardian, the people that created all this mess for Julian in the first place, by not redacting the source data from wikileaks.

 

And I certainly believe that the courts follow the agenda dictated by their governments.

Julian created this mess for Julian. He has demonstrated time and again that he does consider himself to be responsible and accountable for his actions. 

I would hope that the victims of Assange's alleged sexual crimes will get their day in court but, unfortunately, that now appears very unlikely.

18 minutes ago, SpaceKadet said:

Yes, well, as long as you follow due process, everything is legit....

No due process is well ... a process. It does not say anything about guilt or innocence. 

18 minutes ago, SpaceKadet said:

So, by the same token

, if I write write a name of the a movie, or a song, or a book, followed by 64 characters in my notebook, I am committing copyright infringement.  

If by doing so it lead to people making millions of illegal downloads of movies, songs or books then you would leave yourself open to prosecution. However, I doubt that simply jotting down 64 characters in a notebook would result in illegal downloads taking place 

18 minutes ago, SpaceKadet said:

Let me rewrite that for you:

As a general matter, copyright infringement is anything that RIAA deems to be copyright infringement.

You can rewrite definitions as much and as often as you please. It is completely irrelevant. What counts is the legal definition(s) which I'm pretty certain doesn't mention RIAA.

18 minutes ago, SpaceKadet said:

The funny thing is, how did they know what was on TPB servers, the police raid earlier did not confiscate any TPB servers. Only some other companies and organizations like Piratbyrån, and their ISP.

I don't know and I don't understand what point you are trying to make.

There can be little doubt that Pirate Bay facilitated illegal downloads. This impinges on Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). I can only assume that you do not believe in IPR.

2 hours ago, Bday Prang said:

bias or not I don't really care, certainly looks like a good evenings viewing, if you don't like it nobody is forcing you to watch

You're of course correct that no one can force me to watch GB News which is a blessing.

However, by no stretch of the imagination can it be claimed that GB News is somehow less bias than other media outlets. The political affiliations of tonight's presenters suggests the exact opposite.

1 hour ago, SpaceKadet said:

Yes, because the honorable judges are beyond all reproach and all the verdict are correct. Nordström was the presiding judge and controlled all the narrative. Who are we, the common plebs, to comment on such high standing people.

 

From Peters tweets during the trial it was quite clear how desperate judges were to find something to pin on TPB. The verdict was preordained by the Uber Lords that be. It was just the matter of finding a legal wording.

 

It's the cases like these that make me worried about judges impartiality in any given high profile case. There are always some hidden agendas.

 

BTW, all those million of dollars they were ordered to pay, never got paid, they simply didn't run TPB for profit and had no fortunes of their own as the prosecution speculated.

The first court found Pirate Bay guilty, the Swedish Appeal Court upheld the verdict, the ECJ confirmed the verdict and, in a separate case, a UK court reached a similar conclusion.

Do you believe all these courts were following the same political motivated agenda? It all sounds like a conspiracy theory to me.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jun/15/pirate-bay-european-court-of-justice-rules-infringing-copyright-torrent-sites

On 5/21/2024 at 1:06 PM, Thingamabob said:

Ridiculous. GB News is far less biased and more diverse than any other UK news channel.

On 5/21/2024 at 2:44 PM, Bday Prang said:

totally agree and its pretty much all I watch if i'm in the UK. The only thing I find annoying are the token lefties they are obliged to give airtime to in order to appease the woke ofcom regs. listening to them trying to  argue that black is white can actually be  rather painful and sometimes I actually feel embarrassed for them, that benjamin butterworth character is probably the worst of them all. From the smug smirk on his face its obvious even he does not believe some of the rubbish he comes out with

 

Tonight's GB news schedule:

4:00pm Martin Daubney (former Reform party politician)

7:00pm Dewbs & Co Michelle Dewberry (Reform party member)

8:00pm Farage (Former Brexit party leader)

9:00pm Jacob Rees-Mogg's State of the Nation (Conservative party MP)

10:00pm Patrick Christys Tonight (no idea who he is or what is his political affiliation)

And you consider that line-up to be representative and less bias than the presenters on BBC News, Channel 4, ITV, CNN, etc?

39 minutes ago, SpaceKadet said:

So that does definitely not fit to what TPB was doing, and still do, BTW.

 

Interestingly:

 

"The trial took place in Sweden in 2009. The judge who presided over the case was Tomas Norström. However, his impartiality came under scrutiny as it was revealed that he was a member of pro-copyright organizations, leading to accusations of bias."

Index files could be viewed as  derivatives. (I have no idea whether this formed part of the prosecution's case)

As you are no doubt aware, Judge Norstrom's impartially was the subject of an appeal. This appeal was heard and dismissed. It is also worth noting that there were two other judges in addition to Norstrom.

You might not agree with the verdict but the bottom line is that due process was followed according to Swedish law.

Just now, JonnyF said:

 

Indeed.

 

Sneering "Youse are all Skoom" at the conservatives in one of her low cut, cleavage exposing tops. It' would be quite the sight to behold. 😃

You appear to have given Rayner a Scouse accent.

5 hours ago, James105 said:

 

So 5-10 years of this clown show and then 15-20 years of the country trying to recover from the mess they leave after that, although with the expected increase in low skilled immigrants who will be a net drain on the nations income, infrastructure and culture it may never recover this time.   I can at least relax in the knowledge that however much money they waste, not a single penny of it will be mine as I no longer pay any tax in the UK.   Thankfully I will also not be dependant on the state pension when I am eventually old enough to receive it either so whatever damage they do on that front I will also be protected. 

 

I do feel sorry for those who are wise enough not to vote for either Labour or Conservative who only serve themselves or their fellow globalist elites, but not so much for those who continue to vote for the establishment parties.  

So your solution is what? Raise the drawbridge and have us live like a European version of North Korea?

45 minutes ago, transam said:

I can just imagine Angela Rayner in control, approaching the despatch box with a pint of Newcastle Brown Ale in here hand, and the recording chap struggling to bleep out the expletives.........😱................😂

Rayner's from Manchester, Trans. Unlikely to be drinking Newkie Brown, more likely she'll have a pint of Bodies😉

5 minutes ago, SpaceKadet said:

They did not need permission to host indexing files. The companies do not own IP rights for the indexes.

 

It is almost impossible to explain how torrents works to laymen. It's just beyond their comprehension level.

And let's face it, the legal entities in the court didn't had a clue about what was discussed.

 At that time I was following Peter Sunde's tweets from the court house. 

 

You're just quoting dry data from Wikipedia.

Try torrentfreak.com for real information about the trial. There is also a documentary made, "TPB AFK", but you would probably have to go The Pirate Bay to download it 

The concept of copyright infringement (see below) is imo an easy concept to grasp, although you seem to be unable or unwilling to accept it. Whether you believe it to be a 'just' law is completely irrelevant.

The simple fact is that a Swedish court and Appeal Court found PB guilty of copyright infringement. I imagine that the verdict would have been the same had the trial been held in the UK, US or Timbuktu although, of course, that is my opinion not a fact.

-----++++

"What is copyright infringement?

As a general matter, copyright infringement occurs when a copyrighted work is reproduced, distributed, performed, publicly displayed, or made into a derivative work without the permission of the copyright owner."

10 minutes ago, SpaceKadet said:

Exactly, there were no illegal files hosted on their servers.

But that's totally off topic for this tread, so let's not bother continuing.

The only way that your statement can be true is if you redefine the word 'illegal'.

PB hosted files when they did not have permission to do so. The site broached companies' Intellectual Property Rights. This is illegal and a criminal offence.

21 hours ago, SpaceKadet said:

Exactly, sentenced by the judge who at the same time was working for RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America). No conflict of interest there, right?

 

Obviously you're just quoting dry data from Wikipedia, and are not aware of the full story or the follow-up. They were convicted on the bogus charges, but the best thing is that the police did not confiscate any of the TPB servers. They were located at a different locations and TPB was up 3 days later.

The appeal court concluded that “The Pirate Bay has facilitated illegal file sharing in a way that results in criminal liability for those who run the service.”

That's a pretty definite and unambiguous statement. What is bogus about It? Are you suggesting that PB didn't engage in illegal file sharing?

6 hours ago, Red Forever said:

Wrong. With regard to the "sexual assault" the blame lies with the US. The charges were dropped when it was revealed that the "victim" was a CIA operative who laid the honey trap. 

Wrong.

Firstly, there were three victims not just one as you suggest. Secondly, the 'lesser' charges were dropped due to the stature of limitation in Swedish law (the charges effectively timed out). Thirdly, the Swedish prosecutor decided to drop the remaining charges and close the case because "the evidence has weakened considerably due to the long period of time that has elapsed" but said that "the complainant had submitted a credible and reliable version of events". Hardly an admission that they believed Assange to be innocent.

6 minutes ago, SpaceKadet said:

Because the US of A  is Sweden's overlord, and dictates to the Swedish government what to do in cases which they have an interest in.

He might not even have been extradited, but just disappeared. Some American alphabet agencies are very good at the disappearing thing. 

 

Remember the raid on TPB servers in 2006 and the following court case? The TPB did not break any Swedish law, and the primary judge was later found to be a legal consultant to RAAA. Coincidence? OH NO! Conspiracy theory CH would say.

"In April 2009, the website's founders–Fredrik Neij, Peter Sunde and Gottfrid Svartholm–were found guilty in the Pirate Bay trial in Sweden for assisting in copyright infringement and were sentenced to serve one year in prison and pay a fine." (Source: Wikipedia)

3 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

How do they know the speech is powerful ahead of time?

 

One nit: Palestinians are Semites, too.

Copies of speeches are often given to the media before they are actually delivered.

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

That was obvious and IMO it's very doubtful that the charges were genuine. One suspects they were invented to get him to Sweden where the US would have stepped in to extradite him to the US where they doubtless want to lock him up for his remaining lifetime as a warning to any journalist that would have the gall to expose US war crimes.

Why is obvious that the UK would have extradited Assange to Sweden so that Sweden, in turn, could extradite him to the UK?

Why would Sweden - a country admired for being largely free from corruption (see quote below) - embroil itself in a scandal by inventing charges against Assange? What's in it for them?

What evidence exists to support any of these opinions? Answer: None. As Chomper has correctly stated throughout this thread, it is all conspiratorial nonsense.

--------

"Transparency International's 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index scored Sweden at 82 on a scale from 0 ("highly corrupt") to 100 ("very clean"). When ranked by score, Sweden ranked 6th among the 180 countries in the Index, where the country ranked first is perceived to have the most honest public sector." (Source: Wikipedia).