Thanks for the link Mark. An eye opener for me....and not a happy one.....

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the Assange case this is a disgraceful position for the UK.....no doubt sold by the last government.

I wonder if Assange is going to cut PFC Manning in on his royalties to help defray HIS attorney fees?

I thought Assange's legal assistance was being provided pro bono.

______________________________________________________

Assange says signed 1.1 million pounds in book deals

Dec 25 11:09 PM US/Eastern

WikiLeaks chief Julian Assange said in an interview published Sunday he had signed deals for his autobiography worth more than one million pounds (1.2 million euros, 1.5 million dollars).

Assange told Britain's Sunday Times newspaper that the money would help him defend himself against allegations of sexual assault made by two women in Sweden.

"I don't want to write this book, but I have to," he said. "I have already spent 200,000 pounds for legal costs and I need to defend myself and to keep WikiLeaks afloat."

Rest of the story here: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.f9f35e312275753acb9bd147d6582f48.3c1&show_article=1

I wonder if Assange is going to cut PFC Manning in on his royalties to help defray HIS attorney fees?

I thought Assange's legal assistance was being provided pro bono.

______________________________________________________

Assange says signed 1.1 million pounds in book deals

Dec 25 11:09 PM US/Eastern

WikiLeaks chief Julian Assange said in an interview published Sunday he had signed deals for his autobiography worth more than one million pounds (1.2 million euros, 1.5 million dollars).

Assange told Britain's Sunday Times newspaper that the money would help him defend himself against allegations of sexual assault made by two women in Sweden.

"I don't want to write this book, but I have to," he said. "I have already spent 200,000 pounds for legal costs and I need to defend myself and to keep WikiLeaks afloat."

Rest of the story here: http://www.breitbart...&show_article=1

What would be really cool is if his book were just a collection of his own private emails - uncensored. Heck, I'd probably even pay good money for that.

I wonder if Assange is going to cut PFC Manning in on his royalties to help defray HIS attorney fees?

I thought Assange's legal assistance was being provided pro bono.

______________________________________________________

Assange says signed 1.1 million pounds in book deals

Dec 25 11:09 PM US/Eastern

WikiLeaks chief Julian Assange said in an interview published Sunday he had signed deals for his autobiography worth more than one million pounds (1.2 million euros, 1.5 million dollars).

Rest of the story here: http://www.breitbart...&show_article=1

What would be really cool is if his book were just a collection of his own private emails - uncensored. Heck, I'd probably even pay good money for that.

Maybe we will get to read those at one of his trials.

I wonder if Assange is going to cut PFC Manning in on his royalties to help defray HIS attorney fees?

I thought Assange's legal assistance was being provided pro bono.

______________________________________________________

Assange says signed 1.1 million pounds in book deals

Dec 25 11:09 PM US/Eastern

WikiLeaks chief Julian Assange said in an interview published Sunday he had signed deals for his autobiography worth more than one million pounds (1.2 million euros, 1.5 million dollars).

Rest of the story here: http://www.breitbart...&show_article=1

What would be really cool is if his book were just a collection of his own private emails - uncensored. Heck, I'd probably even pay good money for that.

Maybe we will get to read those at one of his trials.

Are you so sure that he will go to trial (for espionage or whatever US charges are laid)?

Are you so sure that he will go to trial (for espionage or whatever US charges are laid)?

whether he goes to trial or not is irrelevant. Wikileaks will not cease to exist... much to the dismay of those who are frothing around their mouths.

p.s. anybody who is utterly naïve and believes that Assange was not framed has my sympathy but then... nobody can't be THAT naïve

Are you so sure that he will go to trial (for espionage or whatever US charges are laid)?

whether he goes to trial or not is irrelevant. Wikileaks will not cease to exist... much to the dismay of those who are frothing around their mouths.

p.s. anybody who is utterly naïve and believes that Assange was not framed has my sympathy but then... nobody can't be THAT naïve

Naam have you stopped reading the General Forum?

Naive? Try searching, Sin Sot, Thai good girl, Mine is different or Happily married.

Thai Visa is right up there with the tooth fairy, Santa Clause and UFOs.

This just out today.

______________________________________________________

Judge says WikiLeaks' Assange can be extradited

By CASSANDRA VINOGRAD, Associated Press – 1 min ago

LONDON – WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange can be extradited to Sweden over sex crimes claims, a judge said Thursday. Assange's lawyer said he would appeal the ruling.

Judge Howard Riddle said the allegations of rape and sexual molestation by two women are extraditable offenses and a Swedish warrant was properly issued.

Assange has been out on bail during the extradition fight, and has seven days to appeal the ruling to the High Court.

Riddle said "there is simply no reason to believe there has been a mistake" about the arrest warrant.

Assange's lawyers have questioned Sweden's judicial process and expressed concern their client risks being handed over to the U.S., which is investigating whether Assange's website should be held responsible for obtaining hundreds of thousands of classified United States government and military documents and posting large numbers of them on the Internet.

Lawyers for Sweden have argued that authorities made repeated attempts to interview Assange while he was in Scandinavia, but to no avail.

In his ruling, the judge attacked the defense case against extradition point by point. He said he is satisfied that the crimes Assange, 39, is accused of are extraditable offenses, and rejected the claim that comments made against Assange by prosecutors and politicians in Sweden would pervert the course of justice.

Article continues here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110224/ap_on_hi_te/eu_britain_wikileaks_assange

Louise Nordstrom and Karl Ritter in Stockholm contributed to this story.

Are you so sure that he will go to trial (for espionage or whatever US charges are laid)?

whether he goes to trial or not is irrelevant. Wikileaks will not cease to exist... much to the dismay of those who are frothing around their mouths.

p.s. anybody who is utterly naïve and believes that Assange was not framed has my sympathy but then... nobody can't be THAT naïve

I have read the entire investigation. I dont think Assange was framed.

Have you read the investigation (including all interrogations)?

Are you so sure that he will go to trial (for espionage or whatever US charges are laid)?

whether he goes to trial or not is irrelevant. Wikileaks will not cease to exist... much to the dismay of those who are frothing around their mouths.

p.s. anybody who is utterly naïve and believes that Assange was not framed has my sympathy but then... nobody can't be THAT naïve

I have read the entire investigation. I dont think Assange was framed.

Have you read the investigation (including all interrogations)?

In my opinion, the level of naivety reaches ridiculous proportions amongst conspiracy theorists who doesn't even know the facts of the case.

What IS noticeable, is the number of questions from Julian during the opening phase of the initial interrogation, questions regarding the level of confidentiality of the information - he displays a high level of concern when he's informed that the interrogation could be made public if he is prosecuted. It is obvious that he doesn't want this information to be made public. Hilarious.

Max Hastings is a journalist who most of the British public probably haven't even heard of.

The Daily Mail is a shit stirring right wing rag that, in the recent past, supported Hitler, Mussolini and the British Unions of Fascists.

Julian Assange is a hypocrite. We won't know whether he's a sleazeball until he's had his day in court. He's also the man who has enough information to make governments and corporates around the world very uncomfortable. Along with many others I suspect that the sex charges have a lot to do with that fact.

Until a UK court is satisfied there is enough evidence to extradite him on these charges that will remain unanswered. Interesting the authorities have failed so far to produce this

Isn't it?

Innocent until proven guilty in the UK....and we're proud of this...and our impartiality in dealing with such cases. The US wants this guy badly as we all know...read what you will.....

Interesting that all the negative comments are coming from the great brainwashed believers even though he's not been convicted of anything as yet.

Smear away folks!

There are no charges from the Swedish Courts yet. In Sweden he has to be interviewed and formally charged.

At the moment there are only allegations.

Yet on those allegations a judge in UK yesterday saw fit to say that he must go to Sweden to be charged. This is a nonsense (whatever the reality of the charges) and is being appealed - right up to the European Court of Human Rights, if necessary. (If the UK is still recognising them, by the time any appeal arrives there).

No comment on Wikileaks. If it starts to cover other areas of cover-up, fine. If it concentrates on US military and similar actions, then no, it would be on a crusade.

Max Hastings is a journalist who most of the British public probably haven't even heard of.

The Daily Mail is a shit stirring right wing rag that, in the recent past, supported Hitler, Mussolini and the British Unions of Fascists.

Julian Assange is a hypocrite. We won't know whether he's a sleazeball until he's had his day in court. He's also the man who has enough information to make governments and corporates around the world very uncomfortable. Along with many others I suspect that the sex charges have a lot to do with that fact.

Until a UK court is satisfied there is enough evidence to extradite him on these charges that will remain unanswered. Interesting the authorities have failed so far to produce this

Isn't it?

Innocent until proven guilty in the UK....and we're proud of this...and our impartiality in dealing with such cases. The US wants this guy badly as we all know...read what you will.....

Interesting that all the negative comments are coming from the great brainwashed believers even though he's not been convicted of anything as yet.

Smear away folks!

There are no charges from the Swedish Courts yet. In Sweden he has to be interviewed and formally charged.

At the moment there are only allegations.

Yet on those allegations a judge in UK yesterday saw fit to say that he must go to Sweden to be charged. This is a nonsense (whatever the reality of the charges) and is being appealed - right up to the European Court of Human Rights, if necessary. (If the UK is still recognising them, by the time any appeal arrives there).

1. The court doesn't press any charges.

2. Why is it nonsense? Have you read the material and all interrogations?

The prosecutor in Sweden issued a warrant for his arrest based on the forensic report and the conversations with the forensic experts, the interrogations with 11 witnesses and finally the interrogation with Julian himself.

I'm confident Julian didn't have a freaking clue that according to Swedish law his behavior (regardless the level of sleaziness) is rated as rape/molestation. I'm as equally confident a majority of conspiracy theorists doesn't know jack shit about the interrogation/investigation.

I dont know much about Swedish law, but I know enough to say this: After reading the investigation I'm confident Julian Assange will be prosecuted and convicted for rape/molestation. After serving time he will be set free and it will be over with.

A Megalomaniac Sleazeball? You bet...

Being a high profile person doesn't help Assange. The bigger they are the harder they fall. People can be pretty opportunistic. There are stories to be sold and fame to be had.

I doubt there is a conspiracy, but he will be watched. I also doubt that Sweden, which is pretty independent and not particularly happy with US military intervention, is going to be easily swayed by US pressure of any kind. Between an individuals rights and a the US, I think Assange will win. The US will have to come with a pretty good case, but they won't touch him until the Swedes are done with him and unless he's incarcerated, they will have trouble getting him.

The US gov't knows it's problem is not Assange, per se, but leaks. Assange is no longer front page news. He will be followed by others. That's the basic problem and the gov't knows it.

Is this the best Thaivisa can do on the Wikileaks/ Assange debate?

Know wonder the world is in dire straits!

What happened to all the colourful and informed characters on this site?

Assange is very much yesterdays news.

When I was young, we used to have a party line for the telephone. For some of the younger posters, this meant that there were many people on the same phone line. A different ring for each family. We thought it was the neatest think to listen in on other people's conversations--for a really brief time.

Wikileaks is much like that.

They just dumped a ton of conversations--most with little information and a few opinions. No analysis.

George W Bush snubs summit over Julian Assange speech

FORMER US president George W. Bush has scrapped plans to address a summit of young business executives this weekend because WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange would also speak to the group, his office says.

"The former President has no desire to share a forum with a man who has willfully and repeatedly done great harm to the interests of the United States," his spokesman, David Sherzer, said in a statement.

Mr Bush had accepted an invitation six months ago to deliver the closing keynote speech today to the Young Presidents' Association's Global Leadership Summit in Denver, Colorado, Mr Sherzer said.

"This week, upon learning that Julian Assange had recently been invited to address the same summit, President Bush decided to cancel his appearance," said Mr Sherzer.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/breaking-news/george-w-bush-snubs-summit-over-julian-assange-speech/story-e6frea73-1226012387915

Talk about another yesterday's news person.

These two should be addressing a conference of psychiatrists and psychologists. They both seem to have significant issues that we quickly need to find a medical fix for.

Sorry?

This is old news?

It's today's date on the source, it's a Murdoch paper they should be able to get that right.

<br />

<br />Max Hastings is a journalist who most of the British public probably haven't even heard of.<br /><br />The Daily Mail is a shit stirring right wing rag that, in the recent past, supported Hitler, Mussolini and the British Unions of Fascists.<br /><br /><br />Julian Assange is a hypocrite. We won't know whether he's a sleazeball until he's had  his day in court. He's also the man who has enough information to make governments and corporates around the world very uncomfortable. Along with many others I suspect that the sex charges have a lot to do with that fact.<br />

<br /><br />Until a UK court is satisfied there is enough evidence to extradite him on these charges that will remain unanswered. Interesting the authorities have failed so far to produce this<br /><br />Isn't it?<br /><br />Innocent until proven guilty in the UK....and we're proud of this...and our impartiality in dealing with such cases. The US wants this guy badly as we all know...read what you will.....<img src='http://static.thaivisa.com/forum/public/style_emoticons/default/whistling.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> <br /><br />Interesting that all the negative comments are coming from the great brainwashed believers even though he's not been convicted of anything as yet. <br /><br />Smear away folks!<br />

<br /><br /><br />

There's been a lot of activity by Swedes on the Internet trying to find out what the case was all about. Basically, what happened was, the two women who went to the police did not want to file a rape charge against Assange; instead, their aim was to see if there was a way they could legally make him take an HIV test, since he had had sex with them without using a condom (after previously having had consensual intercourse in which a condom was used). In one case, Assange slipped it in without a condom in the morning when the woman was still asleep. She did not protest at the time, but afterwards felt that since they had agreed to use a condom, he was not keeping his part of the deal, and when he then refused to take an HIV test, she went to the police in order to check if it was possible to force him to take the test.

The Swedish prosecutor was the person who decided to turn these two incidents into a rape case.

So while Assange did break the deal he had with these two women by not using a condom, which is clearly immoral, my feeling is that many people would not quite define what happened as "rape".

I personally do not believe in a conspiracy by the US at this stage. Swedish rape laws and the profile of the prosecutor makes me think that a) the prosecutor is trying to boost her career by trying out the new more strict definitions of rape in Swedish law, and she wanted a precedent with Assange as the perpetrator, since the international angle will ensure more media attention to the the judicial process

In other words, a careerist/feminst idealist (or possibly just feminist idealist), not somebody bribed or coerced to do so by the US. Even though that type of action by the US would not surprise me in the least, I still don't think it is the case here. This despite the fact that the current Swedish government is actually relatively pro-US, compared to previous ones.

In one case, Assange slipped it in without a condom in the morning when the woman was still asleep.

Without using a condom even though the woman insisted on it? In the age of HIV that sounds pretty darn close to rape to me.

It now appears everybody is guilty except Assange.

Maybe we will get to read those at one of his trials.

Read my earlier post regarding Assanges comments in the initial interrogation - he's scared shitless that the information will be made public...

In one case, Assange slipped it in without a condom in the morning when the woman was still asleep.

Without using a condom even though the woman insisted on it? In the age of HIV that sounds pretty darn close to rape to me.

Close to rape, yes. Should it be classified as, and receive the same type and level of punishment as the type of rape where physical coercion is involved and no attraction and/or liaison exists between the two (or more) parties? I don't think so, personally.

But it does merit being classed as a crime with some sort of punishment, somewhere on the scale between molestation and rape. Calling Assange a sleazeball for doing it is fine with me. It doesn't take away from the fact that Wikileaks has been a good thing, overall.

Maybe we will get to read those at one of his trials.

Read my earlier post regarding Assanges comments in the initial interrogation - he's scared shitless that the information will be made public...

Oh, the irony of it all.

This article isn't, technically, about Assange. It may be tied in later in his illustrious career however.

______________________________________________________

Army charges WikiLeaks suspect with 'aiding enemy'

By ROBERT BURNS

The Associated Press

Wednesday, March 2, 2011; 9:34 PM

WASHINGTON -- An Army private suspected of leaking hundreds of thousands of sensitive and classified documents to the WikiLeaks anti-secrecy group was charged Wednesday with aiding the enemy, a crime that can bring the death penalty or life in prison.

The Army filed 22 new charges against Pvt. 1st Class Bradley E. Manning, including causing intelligence information to be published on the Internet. The charges don't specify which documents, but the charges involve the suspected distribution by the military analyst of more than 250,000 confidential State Department cables as well as a raft of Iraq and Afghanistan war logs. Thousands of the documents have been published on the WikiLeaks website.

The rest of the story here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/02/AR2011030205207_pf.html

Oh the chagrin when dirty laundry is aired publicly!

If I was a rapist, burglar, thief, murderer, whatever type of criminal, and someone exposed me to the public as being such....what merit is there when I try to supress the information, or condem the exposer?

Oh the chagrin when dirty laundry is aired publicly!

If I was a rapist, burglar, thief, murderer, whatever type of criminal, and someone exposed me to the public as being such....what merit is there when I try to supress the information, or condem the exposer?

I always thought the Aussies should have shot Churchill after Gallipoli. But it is just not done is it old boy. Bradley Manning is a soldier. Some 250,000 men, a lot of them Aussies, were lost at Gallipoli because of bad planning. Someone should have been hung. But it is just not done.

Oh the chagrin when dirty laundry is aired publicly!

If I was a rapist, burglar, thief, murderer, whatever type of criminal, and someone exposed me to the public as being such....what merit is there when I try to supress the information, or condem the exposer?

How do we know that you aren't? Please post ALL of your private correspondence from over the past 20 years and let the world be the judge. Maybe we'll find something else in there that isn't so squeaky clean then it will all be justified. Right?

Please post ALL of your private correspondence from over the past 20 years and let the world be the judge. Maybe we'll find something else in there that isn't so squeaky clean then it will all be justified. Right?

But he is not a civil/public servant acting on your behalf.

Please post ALL of your private correspondence from over the past 20 years and let the world be the judge. Maybe we'll find something else in there that isn't so squeaky clean then it will all be justified. Right?

But he is not a civil/public servant acting on your behalf.

So you are saying that everyone exposed by Assange has been? These people who want complete, uncensored openess should start by setting themselves as an example.