WikiLeaks' Assange denied bail by London court over risk he might abscond again

[Salerno]

1 minute ago, Sujo said:

How is he hiding, he is in jail going through a lawful process, you have been told this many times yet continue to say he is hiding, which is a lie.

 

*cough* reread the post you quoted *cough*

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, Sujo said:

Again, he was only wanted in sweden for questioning, no trial, when he was given asylum.

 

Justice would also be him arguing his case against extradition. Justice works both ways, he isnt a fugitive or on the run. He is certainly arguing his case in court, as you asked.

We’ll he not on the lam now is he.

[Chomper Higgot]

50 minutes ago, tokachinter said:

As always, an interesting variety of comments about Julian Assange here. My view of the man has changed hugely over the last few years. From someone I casually identified as an animal abusing, narcissistic, paedophile Russian rapist responsible for the deaths of hundreds of military personnel and informants to that of one of the greatest journalists and humanitarians of our age. How could I be so wrong? Easy, I absorbed without question all of the above as the legacy media portrayed him to be. What changed my opinion? The answer is I did my own research.  There are plenty of source documents (try the court records of the Manning trial and Assange hearing for starters) and credible reports on the internet that can help you sort fact from fiction. Yes, my internet browsing default is set to 'don't believe anything' so it does take time. I urge you all to spend that time as this issue of press freedom is vital to our future, here in Thailand, as it is all over the world.   

Wow that’s an amazing epiphany and so well described, it leaves those of us who regard Assange as a man needing to face the charges against him with the distinct feeling we are wrong and have failed to do our own research.

 

Well done.

 

 

Of course this is the Internet.

[Jeffr2]

44 minutes ago, Sujo said:

How is he hiding, he is in jail going through a lawful process, you have been told this many times yet continue to say he is hiding, which is a lie.

I was referring to Snowden who's in Russia.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden_asylum_in_Russia

[Sujo]

6 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

I was referring to Snowden who's in Russia.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden_asylum_in_Russia

My apology.

[Sujo]

24 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

We’ll he not on the lam now is he.

He never was. He asked the prosecutor if he could leave sweden, he was told he could as the matter was finalized. A new prosecutor was appointed and reopened the case.

 

He was then wanted for questioning. Apparently sweden has never heard of skype or the telephone and insisted he return. However, an accused is under no obligation to give an interview.

 

It was then assange was granted asylum stating he fesred sweden would extradite him to the US. The US denied he faced charges and had no intention of extraditing him.

 

Later it was confirmed they charged him and requested extradition. He has already served his time for jumping bail and is now held solely for the US charges.

 

I expect him to be extradited but, like anyone, he should be afforded due process which is what is happening now.

[tokachinter]

43 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

If you are not putting up links here to support your opinion, they must be dodgy.  The truth is, he's been indicted by the US for a variety of crimes.  They don't do this for fun, or without reason.  So, it must be serious.

 

He would be out of jail by now if he just dealt with it instead of hiding with his cat.  We have to follow the rule of law.  To do otherwise would be anarchy.

 

Let the court decide his fate, not internet keyboard warriors. LOL

Hi Jeffr2, Apparently, you do not wish to follow my advice about spending your own time to find out the truth. Very well, I'll add some links below to get you started. Regarding the rest of your post; 1/ I agree that the U.S. Government has very good reason to try to silence Julian Assange. Wikileaks' publication of its secrets caused huge embarrassment and political damage to it. 2/ He has been indicted on 17 charges and if found guilty of all the sentence would total over 170 years in jail, not the two years he has served without charge. 3/ I refute that we have to follow the rule of law when it is immoral. I believe the Nuremburg Trials clarified that point.   4/ Yes, the Magistrate in the court case rejected his extradition. The U.S. Government's appeal will be heard in the Court of Appeals in a couple of months time. 

Link for Jeffr2:    https://assangecourt.report/index.html  As well as daily summaries of the extradition hearing you can find download links there to all the sworn witness statements and the actual judgement by Magistrate Baraitser. Let me know how you go and if you need any more help and in what area.                                     

[Jeffr2]

6 minutes ago, tokachinter said:

Hi Jeffr2, Apparently, you do not wish to follow my advice about spending your own time to find out the truth. Very well, I'll add some links below to get you started. Regarding the rest of your post; 1/ I agree that the U.S. Government has very good reason to try to silence Julian Assange. Wikileaks' publication of its secrets caused huge embarrassment and political damage to it. 2/ He has been indicted on 17 charges and if found guilty of all the sentence would total over 170 years in jail, not the two years he has served without charge. 3/ I refute that we have to follow the rule of law when it is immoral. I believe the Nuremburg Trials clarified that point.   4/ Yes, the Magistrate in the court case rejected his extradition. The U.S. Government's appeal will be heard in the Court of Appeals in a couple of months time. 

Link for Jeffr2:    https://assangecourt.report/index.html  As well as daily summaries of the extradition hearing you can find download links there to all the sworn witness statements and the actual judgement by Magistrate Baraitser. Let me know how you go and if you need any more help and in what area.                                     

embarrassment?  Political damage?  How about damage to our security forces?  Showing all sorts of confidential docs.  How about I go to your house and release all your emails, browsing history and pics.  Would that be OK?  No...

 

He broke the law.  That's been proven.  Sad you don't want to follow the rule of law.  Are you an anarchist?

[sanuk711]

6 hours ago, ezzra said:

Nothing to do with any 'Truth' here, he and with the help of another traitor analyst Manning stole 500,000 confidential files files detailing aspects of military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq, no truth no nothing, just a thieving act for money and notoriety.

It was 700,000 files in total  and  no money was involved.

 

   Only 91,000 files covered what is now called The Afghan War documents leak  of this 75,000 of the documents have been released to the public, a move which WikiLeaks says is "part of a harm minimization process demanded by [the] source. There was never any detailing of any active military operation released.

The Guardian described it as a devastating portrait of the failing war in Afghanistan revealing how coalition forces have killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents,

 

You may be interested in what the other thousands of files contain ezzra.

They range from a 2010, video showing a US helicopter crew laughing as they launched an air strike killing a dozen people in Baghdad in July 2007, including a photographer and driver working for the Reuters news agency-----the corruption of the government we were supporting, shown up when details of one incident reported (then covered up) in October 2009  the then vice-president, Ahmad Zia Massoud, was stopped and questioned in Dubai carrying $52m in cash. They carry reports on corruption on all sides with a report of Prince Andrew over there taking a % for business deals and at a brunch with overseas business people (which someone recorded) in which he railed against British anticorruption investigators, all journalists and the French. Who apparently weren't as pliable as he would have liked. The last dump of cables were about those held at the Guantánamo Bay prison, written between 2002 and 2009.  The files showed that some prisoners had long ago been cleared for release but remained detained. & still do.

 

Wikileaks is not just about a corrupt unwinnable war--it has shown corruption where ever it was.

The former Kenyan president Daniel Arap Moi had been siphoning off hundreds of millions of pounds and hiding them away in foreign bank accounts in more than 30 different countries. Exposed by Wiki--  Judges  In one hearing in March 2009 the high court in London decided that no one was allowed to print documents revealing Barclays' tax avoidance strategies – even though they were there for the whole world to read on the WikiLeaks website. The law looked a little silly.

Lawyers who were paid exorbitant sums to protect the reputations of wealthy clients and corporations admitted – that WikiLeaks was the one publisher in the world they couldn't gag. It was very bad for business.

 

There are so many other stories --go to their site before you condemn them, type in your country and see what the papers are not allowed (or do not want to print)

 

Years  after the first publication of the cables , no one has been able to demonstrate any damage to life or limb. The sky hasn't fallen in, and we still send kids off to  a war that cant be won.

 

The person who stole them is free, The Newspapers that they were sent to "The Guardian--The New York Times, and Der Spiegel"  and who first printed them so the world could see, Have never had one charge brought against them.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/jan/28/wikileaks-julian-assange-alan-rusbridger

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_War_documents_leak

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/30/bradley-manning-wikileaks-revelations

 

 

 

 

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, sanuk711 said:

It was 700,000 files in total  and  no money was involved.

 

   Only 91,000 files covered what is now called The Afghan War documents leak  of this 75,000 of the documents have been released to the public, a move which WikiLeaks says is "part of a harm minimization process demanded by [the] source. There was never any detailing of any active military operation released.

The Guardian described it as a devastating portrait of the failing war in Afghanistan revealing how coalition forces have killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents,

 

You may be interested in what the other thousands of files contain ezzra.

They range from a 2010, video showing a US helicopter crew laughing as they launched an air strike killing a dozen people in Baghdad in July 2007, including a photographer and driver working for the Reuters news agency-----the corruption of the government we were supporting, shown up when details of one incident reported (then covered up) in October 2009  the then vice-president, Ahmad Zia Massoud, was stopped and questioned in Dubai carrying $52m in cash. They carry reports on corruption on all sides with a report of Prince Andrew over there taking a % for business deals and at a brunch with overseas business people (which someone recorded) in which he railed against British anticorruption investigators, all journalists and the French. Who apparently weren't as pliable as he would have liked. The last dump of cables were about those held at the Guantánamo Bay prison, written between 2002 and 2009.  The files showed that some prisoners had long ago been cleared for release but remained detained. & still do.

 

Wikileaks is not just about a corrupt unwinnable war--it has shown corruption where ever it was.

The former Kenyan president Daniel Arap Moi had been siphoning off hundreds of millions of pounds and hiding them away in foreign bank accounts in more than 30 different countries. Exposed by Wiki--  Judges  In one hearing in March 2009 the high court in London decided that no one was allowed to print documents revealing Barclays' tax avoidance strategies – even though they were there for the whole world to read on the WikiLeaks website. The law looked a little silly.

Lawyers who were paid exorbitant sums to protect the reputations of wealthy clients and corporations admitted – that WikiLeaks was the one publisher in the world they couldn't gag. It was very bad for business.

 

There are so many other stories --go to their site before you condemn them, type in your country and see what the papers are not allowed (or do not want to print)

 

Years  after the first publication of the cables , no one has been able to demonstrate any damage to life or limb. The sky hasn't fallen in, and we still send kids off to  a war that cant be won.

 

The person who stole them is free, The Newspapers that they were sent to "The Guardian--The New York Times, and Der Spiegel"  and who first printed them so the world could see, Have never had one charge brought against them.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/jan/28/wikileaks-julian-assange-alan-rusbridger

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_War_documents_leak

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/30/bradley-manning-wikileaks-revelations

 

 

 

 

Yes, he has done good things. And yes, governments should be kept in check. Problem I have is that is was indiscriminately releasing information, without thinking the consequences through. By doing that he has endangered many lives.

[SpaceKadet]

16 hours ago, Tropicalevo said:

Not 'might' abscond. He would definitely abscond.

He definitely SHOULD abscond!

[4MyEgo]

9 hours ago, ezzra said:

Nothing to do with any 'Truth' here, he and with the help of another traitor analyst Manning stole 500,000 confidential files files detailing aspects of military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq, no truth no nothing, just a thieving act for money and notoriety.

 

Really, and George W Bush junior and his cronies didn't murder hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraq people when they invaded Iraq, stating that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but none were found, yet everyone focuses on Julian for telling the truth, how bent can you be ?

[4MyEgo]

12 minutes ago, stevenl said:

By doing that he has endangered many lives.

 

Endangering many lives Vs killing many innocent is clearly different, read my above post reply.

[4MyEgo]

5 hours ago, kamahele said:

He will be detained during that process as he has proved he is a flight risk.

 

The court court have asked him to surrender his passport and report to police daily, now wouldn't that be better, oh no, we can't have that, he's a flight risk, remembering one has to get a certificate to fly, which takes about 3 days if I am correct, and I don't see many planes flying about do you ?

 

He did his time, but they now want to hold him while there is an appeal going on, based on wait for it, his mental health condition, what a crock of BS, and justice prevails until the USA gets it's way, nothing to do with him skipping his bail last time, he paid for his crime, and should be released, but yeh, tell that to the judge who holds the power under someone up top telling her exactly how it's going to pan out.

[GrandPapillon]

They want to crucify Assange as an example for further whistle blowers,

 

it's an easy target, as he comes across as a spoiled entitled brat

 

but the fact remains that this is political persecution by a "democratic" state with the support of other "democratic" states trying to hide the dark face of their underground actions

[stevenl]

39 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

 

Endangering many lives Vs killing many innocent is clearly different, read my above post reply.

Which is not an excuse for either.

[Proboscis]

18 hours ago, stevenl said:

Rightfully so, flight is a risk here.

Under normal circumstances I would be inclined to agree that the possibilities of flight risk would be there. But where can one run to now. First, he would need a covid test. Then he would need a flight. Most countries are refusing flights from the UK anyway. Those that do are only allowing the foreign country's citizens or permanent residents. And those are currently very few. I suppose he could flee by sea. But that is not easy either. Movement around the UK is now very restricted due to covid. Getting to a port would not be easy and slipping onto a ship would not be easy. Getting onto a private yacht might be possible but any movement out of a harbour would be suspicious. Besides, they could make him wear an ankle bracelet.

 

IMHO, there is an appetite for the punishing of Mr. Assange. No action has been taken against any of the media outlets and there have been no deaths resulting from the highly redacted and edited/curated leaks despite the dire warnings from the Americans who were highly embarassed by the revelations of what were frankly war crimes, torture and illegal kidnapping across borders (which is what rendition is and was). Much of the stuff that was thrown at him was highly questionable, including the "rape charges" that miraculously went away when they were no longer needed or the other claims that he influenced others to act illegally which has never stood up in court.

 

I am not saying that Mr Assange is the nicest person on the planet. But he did a service to the operness of society and history will eventually treat him well.

[Nout]

Disgusting. The cowardly British establishment bending to the will of America. The courts give bail to  really serious criminals including, murderes, rapists etc.  He is a political prisoner. Shameful

[Nout]

18 hours ago, Tropicalevo said:

Not 'might' abscond. He would definitely abscond.

Where to?

[Jeffr2]

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

Yes, he has done good things. And yes, governments should be kept in check. Problem I have is that is was indiscriminately releasing information, without thinking the consequences through. By doing that he has endangered many lives.

That's what many don't get.  He not only profited financially off this, he put others lives at risk.  I wouldn't call him a hero.  Far from that.

[Jeffr2]

2 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

 

Really, and George W Bush junior and his cronies didn't murder hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraq people when they invaded Iraq, stating that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but none were found, yet everyone focuses on Julian for telling the truth, how bent can you be ?

Agreed.  But you can't compare the two.  Just a deflection.

[Jeffr2]

32 minutes ago, Nout said:

Disgusting. The cowardly British establishment bending to the will of America. The courts give bail to  really serious criminals including, murderes, rapists etc.  He is a political prisoner. Shameful

Cowardly for upholding the law?  You've got a strange view of things.  It's got nothing to do with politics.  Just about breaking the law.

[spiekerjozef]

2 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

 

Really, and George W Bush junior and his cronies didn't murder hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraq people when they invaded Iraq, stating that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but none were found, yet everyone focuses on Julian for telling the truth, how bent can you be ?

The beloved leader killed 4 people yesterday but he is a free man and Assange is in prison for revealing paperwork that tell the truth.

A very sick world indeed.

[Pilotman]

38 minutes ago, Nout said:

Where to?

The nearest South American Embassy. He has form after all

[spiekerjozef]

43 minutes ago, Nout said:

Disgusting. The cowardly British establishment bending to the will of America. The courts give bail to  really serious criminals including, murderes, rapists etc.  He is a political prisoner. Shameful

Giving up Prince Andrew would be a good start.

[4MyEgo]

4 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

He broke the law.  That's been proven.  Sad you don't want to follow the rule of law.  Are you an anarchist?

 

Oh, so the American government did nothing wrong, who are you kidding.

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, Proboscis said:

Under normal circumstances I would be inclined to agree that the possibilities of flight risk would be there. But where can one run to now. First, he would need a covid test. Then he would need a flight. Most countries are refusing flights from the UK anyway. Those that do are only allowing the foreign country's citizens or permanent residents. And those are currently very few. I suppose he could flee by sea. But that is not easy either. Movement around the UK is now very restricted due to covid. Getting to a port would not be easy and slipping onto a ship would not be easy. Getting onto a private yacht might be possible but any movement out of a harbour would be suspicious. Besides, they could make him wear an ankle bracelet.

 

IMHO, there is an appetite for the punishing of Mr. Assange. No action has been taken against any of the media outlets and there have been no deaths resulting from the highly redacted and edited/curated leaks despite the dire warnings from the Americans who were highly embarassed by the revelations of what were frankly war crimes, torture and illegal kidnapping across borders (which is what rendition is and was). Much of the stuff that was thrown at him was highly questionable, including the "rape charges" that miraculously went away when they were no longer needed or the other claims that he influenced others to act illegally which has never stood up in court.

 

I am not saying that Mr Assange is the nicest person on the planet. But he did a service to the operness of society and history will eventually treat him well.

Mexico has offered asylum, I'm sure he could get there. And if he looks around others will do the same.

 

One of the problems I have with him is that this 'highly redacted and edited/curated leaks' is true for some batches, but at the end he was just releasing without editing/redacting.

[4MyEgo]

5 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

The truth is, he's been indicted by the US for a variety of crimes.  They don't do this for fun, or without reason.  So, it must be serious.

Witch hunts in the US are plentiful, just ask TRUMP, wasn't he in bed with the Russians, why do you think his supporters took over Capital Hill today, because they don't believe in the voting process, yes they too broke the law.

 

Laws are meant to be broken when your brake, i.e. instead of listening to all the BS out there, each to their own, right you are then, being a law abiding citizen we are mostly, but when things don't add up and things need to be exposed, it takes a hero to expose to get the truth out there, and the big boys don't like that, and will come after you with all of their might, don't confuse law with power, they cannot be separated and are there to control the masses, they are one.

 

I will let you work that one out.

[Pilotman]

2 hours ago, GrandPapillon said:

They want to crucify Assange as an example for further whistle blowers,

 

it's an easy target, as he comes across as a spoiled entitled brat

 

but the fact remains that this is political persecution by a "democratic" state with the support of other "democratic" states trying to hide the dark face of their underground actions

those who have never served seem to think that war is some kind of kids movie, where people, get shot , fall over, but then go home afterwards , no blood and guts. no innocents killed, just bad troops on the other side.  War is ugly and brutal and people die, lots of them and if you look at the stats for WW2, more civilians in France died after D Day than Allied troops. War is not Disney Land.  Assuage, or whatever his name is (i couldn't even be bothered to find out), told us nothing that thinking people didn't  already know. All he did was put the lives of those who serve, especially in the Security Services, at risk. I hope the US locks him up for ever. 

[tokachinter]

Quick question for those believing Julian Assange would abscond if released on bail. Which country (or country's embassy) would he flee to?

4 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Mexico has offered asylum, I'm sure he could get there. And if he looks around others will do the same.

 

One of the problems I have with him is that this 'highly redacted and edited/curated leaks' is true for some batches, but at the end he was just releasing without editing/redacting.

Mexico's president has offered asylum after the extradition appeal has been quashed. If released pending the appeal, the safest country for him to be in right now is the Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Island (unless the U.S. does another midnight rendition) If you read the hearing testimonies you will discover the reason he only released non-redacted files on Wikileaks (where everyone could read them) after the Guardian reporters released a key to the online trove of unredacted files. His aim was to alert informants who would be unlikely to otherwise know unless they were as tech savvy as the ISIS, etc. who would be coming for them. You'll also read how he telephoned the U.S. State Department to warn them (Wikileaks and the other publishers had been seeking their assistance on redactions prior to that).