Assange the rapist headed to face the music

[Fogdog]

Have you actually read up on this from reputable sources? The two women came forward to ask that he be forced to test for STD's because Assange. If he had done so, and passed, this would all be over with. "misconduct"?

This fits the legal definition of rape:

Early the next morning, Miss W told police, she had gone to buy breakfast before getting back into bed and falling asleep beside Assange. She had awoken to find him having sex with her, she said, but when she asked whether he was wearing a condom he said no. "According to her statement, she said: 'You better not have HIV' and he answered: 'Of course not,' " but "she couldn't be bothered to tell him one more time because she had been going on about the condom all night. She had never had unprotected sex before.


https://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden

The rape charges have not been dropped although the warrant for his arrest has been withdrawn.

 

[Fogdog]

It's a setup he's been declared enemy of the state they will do anything to get him.
If sweden extradites him to the us then you know it's a setup. Getting some women to claim sexual misconduct then morph into rape is no big deal for the CIA or NSA right after he leaks. C'mon stop being so stupid

I'm just citing the facts. You do realize that your conspiracy theory has nothing but your belief to back it up, don't you? Has Sweden said they would extradite? Has the US requested extradition? Are there charges in the US against Assange? Some links from reputable sources might make me less skeptical.

Not saying he's guilty but those women have their right to their day in court. Rape is a serious offense, don't you think so?

You are using the same defense that other unremorseful rapists have used. How do you know he's innocent? Would you say Weinstein is innocent too? I mean nobody has proven he's guilty yet. Are those women lying too? That's what Weinstein says. Do you believe him?

 

[captainmorgan]

Maybe Assange was only trying to have outercourse with the victim, it's the new scumbag defense of the day.

 

[ttystikk]

No, I'm not. I'm a teacher of Criminal Justice.



He didn't at the time. He was simply wanted in Sweden to answer questions concerning the alleged sexual assault and nothing more.



Which he has been offered for the last 8 years and he's been hiding from.

Let's review, dumbass:

• In November 2010, Sweden issued an international arrest warrant for Assange. At this point, nobody else on earth wanted Assange for anything.
• On December 7th, 2010, Assange surrendered to UK police over the Sweden warrant and was held for ten days before being released on bail. At that point, he began fighting the extradition to Sweden by the UK. He was unsuccessful in his challenge to the extradition proceedings, so he jumped bail and ran and hid in the embassy of Equador and he has been hiding there ever since.

Those are the facts.

You are defending a person who is guilty of several crimes already, and that's before you even get to the sexual assault / rape case.

If you're a criminal Justice teacher, then you know about the presumption of innocence.

Let's see him have his day in court.

That's my position, no more, no less.

 

[Padawanbater2]

I'm just citing the facts. You do realize that your conspiracy theory has nothing but your belief to back it up, don't you? Has Sweden said they would extradite? Has the US requested extradition? Are there charges in the US against Assange? Some links from reputable sources might make me less skeptical.

Not saying he's guilty but those women have their right to their day in court. Rape is a serious offense, don't you think so?

You are using the same defense that other unremorseful rapists have used. How do you know he's innocent? Would you say Weinstein is innocent too? I mean nobody has proven he's guilty yet. Are those women lying too? That's what Weinstein says. Do you believe him?

Why are you trying to pretend you care about Assange because of his other legal issues?

Why don't you just be honest and admit the only reason you care about Assange is because he leaked information that you believe damaged Hillary Clinton's chances at becoming president?

 

[Unclebaldrick]

You are so stupid it's beyond belief.

First off, Sweden cancelled the warrant. They don't want him. So he no longer faces extradition to Sweden.

Secondly, the United States doesn't want him either. They never have. They have no use for him. They asked to speak to him once a couple years ago. He said no. That was it. There is no subpoena for him, no warrant for him, nothing.

NOBODY WANTS HIM..EXCEPT FOR:

The United Kingdom. He (Assange) is guilty of Jumping Bail, among other things. The UK are the only people that give a shit about him at all. Nobody else does. The instant he sets foot out of the embassy, he knows he'll be arrested by the English police, who will take him back to jail and hold him until he is tried and convicted of his crimes. Then he'll probably gets sentenced to a few months in jail and a large fine.

That's it. That's all there is to it.

I strongly suggest that people look up the pieces done by the NYT and The Guardian where they tell the story behind their publishing of his leaks. The man is truly unstable, a horrible narcissist and utterly ruthless in his willingness to cut his collaborators' throats to gain self-promotion.

A perfect hero for the Progressives (TM) in other words.

 

[Unclebaldrick]

If you're a criminal Justice teacher, then you know about the presumption of innocence.

Let's see him have his day in court.

That's my position, no more, no less.

Except he ran from his "day in court".

Jeez, do your homework.

 

[Fogdog]

Why are you trying to pretend you care about Assange because of his other legal issues?

Why don't you just be honest and admit the only reason you care about Assange is because he leaked information that you believe damaged Hillary Clinton's chances at becoming president?

Two women say Assange sexually abused them. One's testimony fits the legal definition of rape. Are you saying hers was not "legitimate rape"?

Swedish officials found grounds to charge Assange with rape. This is not some trivial matter of he-said, she-said.

You are using the same line of defense that Weinstein is using. Bill Cosby too. Larry Nassar, the guy who molested 150 girls too. As a men's rights advocate, you should probably side with them too.

 

[ttystikk]

Anybody who ever finished school and did not spend all their time playing ultimate frisbee would know that Harvard has a lot of professors and they don't all agree.

sad.

Yet they are all a lot smarter than you, smogdog, Buckwit and the rest of the establishment circle jerkers constantly bloviating here.

Rather than debate the merits, you all constantly make personal attacks, which hurts your credibility.

Even the Mod here erases posts to favor you.

Y'all are in a bubble of your own making, and refuse to accept credible sources that might challenge your assumptions.

I leave you to it.

 

[Fogdog]

If you're a criminal Justice teacher, then you know about the presumption of innocence.

Let's see him have his day in court.

That's my position, no more, no less.

Let's see him have his day in court.

That's my position too.

 

[Unclebaldrick]

Yet they are all a lot smarter than you, smogdog, Buckwit and the rest of the establishment circle jerkers constantly bloviating here.

Rather than debate the merits, you all constantly make personal attacks, which hurts your credibility.

Even the Mod here erases posts to favor you.

Y'all are in a bubble of your own making, and refuse to accept credible sources that might challenge your assumptions.

I leave you to it.

You have got to be kidding. Such ego.

Wow.

 

[Unclebaldrick]

Let's see him have his day in court.

That's my position too.

You are a failed state!

 

[Fogdog]

Yet they are all a lot smarter than you, smogdog, Buckwit and the rest of the establishment circle jerkers constantly bloviating here.

Rather than debate the merits, you all constantly make personal attacks, which hurts your credibility.

Even the Mod here erases posts to favor you.

Y'all are in a bubble of your own making, and refuse to accept credible sources that might challenge your assumptions.

I leave you to it.

^^^commonly known as an ad hominem logical fallacy.

 

[travisw]

Yet they are all a lot smarter than you, smogdog, Buckwit and the rest of the establishment circle jerkers constantly bloviating here.

Rather than debate the merits, you all constantly make personal attacks, which hurts your credibility.

Even the Mod here erases posts to favor you.

Y'all are in a bubble of your own making, and refuse to accept credible sources that might challenge your assumptions.

I leave you to it.

Is this what your idea of debate looks like?

Your post begins by insulting everyone's intelligence, another homophobic slur, and then you have the audacity to claim no one will debate you and people only attack you.

Let's debate what you've said.

Everyone at Harvard is a lot smarter than everyone here but you, the elderly woman from Florida, and the kid who works 120 hrs a week taking care of his family.

I've seen pictures of you in a college sweatshirt. Did you go and did you finish? I did. I'll post my academic qualifications if you will.

Do you work? I've been a full stack developer for that last few years. Before that I was a project editor at a textbook company. Before that, I was a college professor. What was the last job you had?

As to your constant complaints about moderation favoritism, I've had loads of post deleted. I just don't post about it, because it's a dope forum on the internet. If you hate it why post here?

As to your complaint about not accepting your sources, you post things from blogs, youtube, state run media from hostile foreign governments. If you were debating one of the many Harvard professors you seem to know, would they accept them?

 

[ttystikk]

Is this what your idea of debate looks like?

Your post begins by insulting everyone's intelligence, another homophobic slur, and then you have the audacity to claim no one will debate you and people only attack you.

Let's debate what you've said.

Everyone at Harvard is a lot smarter than everyone here but you, the elderly woman from Florida, and the kid who works 120 hrs a week taking care of his family.

I've seen pictures of you in a college sweatshirt. Did you go and did you finish? I did. I'll post my academic qualifications if you will.

Do you work? I've been a full stack developer for that last few years. Before that I was a project editor at a textbook company. Before that, I was a college professor. What was the last job you had?

As to your constant complaints about moderation favoritism, I've had loads of post deleted. I just don't post about it, because it's a dope forum on the internet. If you hate it why post here?

As to your complaint about not accepting your sources, you post things from blogs, youtube, state run media from hostile foreign governments. If you were debating one of the many Harvard professors you seem to know, would they accept them?

No it isn't. But I've been watching these morons chatter their insults and abuse for years.

You've even been drawn in occasionally, even though you usually manage to resist the temptation.

 

[ttystikk]

Is this what your idea of debate looks like?

Your post begins by insulting everyone's intelligence, another homophobic slur, and then you have the audacity to claim no one will debate you and people only attack you.

Let's debate what you've said.

Everyone at Harvard is a lot smarter than everyone here but you, the elderly woman from Florida, and the kid who works 120 hrs a week taking care of his family.

I've seen pictures of you in a college sweatshirt. Did you go and did you finish? I did. I'll post my academic qualifications if you will.

Do you work? I've been a full stack developer for that last few years. Before that I was a project editor at a textbook company. Before that, I was a college professor. What was the last job you had?

As to your constant complaints about moderation favoritism, I've had loads of post deleted. I just don't post about it, because it's a dope forum on the internet. If you hate it why post here?

As to your complaint about not accepting your sources, you post things from blogs, youtube, state run media from hostile foreign governments. If you were debating one of the many Harvard professors you seem to know, would they accept them?

Yes I got the degree.

Funny how the post deletions play favorites.

The YouTube videos are often OF Harvard professors, so there's that.

 

[Fogdog]

No it isn't. But I've been watching these morons chatter their insults and abuse for years.

You've even been drawn in occasionally, even though you usually manage to resist the temptation.

Appeal to Pity (argumentum ad misericordiam)
Argumentum ad misericordiam is Latin for “argument to compassion”. Like the ad hominem fallacy above, it is a fallacy of relevance. Personal attacks, and emotional appeals, aren’t strictly relevant to whether something is true or false. In this case, the fallacy appeals to the compassion and emotional sensitivity of others when these factors are not strictly relevant to the argument. Appeals to pity often appear as emotional manipulation. For example,

 

[ttystikk]

Appeal to Pity (argumentum ad misericordiam)
Argumentum ad misericordiam is Latin for “argument to compassion”. Like the ad hominem fallacy above, it is a fallacy of relevance. Personal attacks, and emotional appeals, aren’t strictly relevant to whether something is true or false. In this case, the fallacy appeals to the compassion and emotional sensitivity of others when these factors are not strictly relevant to the argument. Appeals to pity often appear as emotional manipulation. For example,

Great way to take responsibility.

 

[Fogdog]

Great way to take responsibility.

 

[Fogdog]

Yes I got the degree.

Funny how the post deletions play favorites.

The YouTube videos are often OF Harvard professors, so there's that.