By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Wikileaks + US diplomacy = biggest "diplomatic" storm ever incoming !

Kasz216 on 11 December 2010
Badassbab said:
Kasz216 said:

Also, you know... you're wrong on that too.

There is world opinon polls that state "Should there be an attack on Iran" in which it is answered now.

If you phrase the question "If negotiations fail to get Iran to stop it's nuclear plans should there be an attack".


The answer is yes.  Most people trust in the negotiations.

The majority of EU states population agree to an attack.

Really?

http://www.thechicagocouncil.org/UserFiles/File/POS_Topline Reports/POS 2010/Global Views 2010.pdf

Iran did agree to a fuel swap deal with Brazil and Turkey but the US would have none of it. Iran is a signatory to NPT. Countries which are not (Israel, North Korea, India and Pakistan) all became nuclear powers.

Did you bother to figure out WHY they US refused it?  I'm guessing not?

It's because it didn't actually cover all the Nuclear Enrichman Iran was already doing that they were going to keep onto... for no apparent reason since it's useless. (Nuclear weapons testing)



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 11 December 2010
Badassbab said:
Kasz216 said:

Also, as for the  losers...

In every case America and Sweden look like losers... because they either look like successful vindicitive dicks... or really incompetant vindicitive dicks.


But others would argue the losers are Wikileaks and Assange, since he is the one who is being hunted, demonised and Wikileaks being attacked by way of withdrawing services and malicious hacks etc. To some including the US administration they are winning in their quest to destroy Wikileaks and it's founders. So you've just given us your opinion, not hard facts.

I'm sorry, demonized by WHO.

The only people who have been demonized by this affair is the people who accused him of rape.

Which is how it works in 90% of rape cases if you haven't noticed.



benao87 on 15 December 2010
Kasz216 said:
benao87 said:
Kasz216 said:
benao87 said:

Here are your sexual charges -.-

"The two Swedish women who accuse WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange of sexual misconduct were at first not seeking to bring charges against him. They just wanted to track him down and persuade him to be tested for sexually transmitted diseases, according to several people in contact with his entourage at the time." -Reuters-

Just because you don't want to charge someone for a crime doesn't mean the state won't charge someone for a crime.  If you assault someone in an alleyway and they turn out to be a sadomaschist and not mind... you still committed a crime... and chances are the police will still prosecute you.

Just because a victim doesn't want to press charges doesn't mean the state won't.  Which is why all the "CIA conspiracy and she works with them" stuff always made me laugh... as did the "They want to get back at him! wild accusatsions" when all evidence pointed to the fact that they reported what happened not even sure it counted as a crime.

People are just making up wild and outlandish stories because they want to protect the guy because he's famous.

When they should let him just go to court, likely be cleared of the rape charges even though what he's accused of is rape and there doesn't seem to be much arguement about the situation, and let the whole thing go.

Could you please confirm me if you read the whole article. Thanks.


Yes.  Why?

I even read the last part where they mention he intentionally left the country when he knew the police wanted to question him.

Whole thing makes you wonder if they got infected with a disease... but that's just baseless speculation

The thing is that you clearly want this guy to go to jail. For what crime I ask? Rape? They had to drop charges on rape, and when they re-opened the case, they had to look for another crime less strong.

The thing is, you and me give our opinion based on assumptions, there are no facts. All the information is based on the declaration of either the entourage of Assange, or the two girls. Then, if one girl didn't want to charge him, until what point did he really commited a crime. I'm not defending the guy, one possibility is that he indeed commited a crime. But, I also take into account the possibility that the guy didn't commited any crime at all.

The only facts are that, they once dropped the case, and then re-opened. And the guy is a pain for the US government. You beleive in the system, so you hope that justice will prevail. Me?, well my opinion of the US government is not that good.

Btw, sorry for the late reply, I was doing a paper for the uni, and I felt that i had to reply this.



Complete comic

Kasz216 on 15 December 2010
benao87 said:
Kasz216 said:
benao87 said:
Kasz216 said:
benao87 said:

Here are your sexual charges -.-

"The two Swedish women who accuse WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange of sexual misconduct were at first not seeking to bring charges against him. They just wanted to track him down and persuade him to be tested for sexually transmitted diseases, according to several people in contact with his entourage at the time." -Reuters-

Just because you don't want to charge someone for a crime doesn't mean the state won't charge someone for a crime.  If you assault someone in an alleyway and they turn out to be a sadomaschist and not mind... you still committed a crime... and chances are the police will still prosecute you.

Just because a victim doesn't want to press charges doesn't mean the state won't.  Which is why all the "CIA conspiracy and she works with them" stuff always made me laugh... as did the "They want to get back at him! wild accusatsions" when all evidence pointed to the fact that they reported what happened not even sure it counted as a crime.

People are just making up wild and outlandish stories because they want to protect the guy because he's famous.

When they should let him just go to court, likely be cleared of the rape charges even though what he's accused of is rape and there doesn't seem to be much arguement about the situation, and let the whole thing go.

Could you please confirm me if you read the whole article. Thanks.


Yes.  Why?

I even read the last part where they mention he intentionally left the country when he knew the police wanted to question him.

Whole thing makes you wonder if they got infected with a disease... but that's just baseless speculation

The thing is that you clearly want this guy to go to jail. For what crime I ask? Rape? They had to drop charges on rape, and when they re-opened the case, they had to look for another crime less strong.

The thing is, you and me give our opinion based on assumptions, there are no facts. All the information is based on the declaration of either the entourage of Assange, or the two girls. Then, if one girl didn't want to charge him, until what point did he really commited a crime. I'm not defending the guy, one possibility is that he indeed commited a crime. But, I also take into account the possibility that the guy didn't commited any crime at all.

The only facts are that, they once dropped the case, and then re-opened. And the guy is a pain for the US government. You beleive in the system, so you hope that justice will prevail. Me?, well my opinion of the US government is not that good.

Btw, sorry for the late reply, I was doing a paper for the uni, and I felt that i had to reply this.

Except... he's being charged with rape.  That report was false.

The fact is, he is beign charged with holding a woman down with his bodyweight and raping her.

The fact that people would defend him with no proof he is innocent abhorrent.

I don' want him to go to jail.  I want him to stand trial without people defending an attempted rapist with no facts backing them up.

I mean hell, the guy is a free market capitalist libretarian.  The only thing I disagree with him on is the publishing of half the documents he's publishing because they don't show any criminal behavior.



Lyrikalstylez on 15 December 2010

The illuminati put him in jail because they dont want him revealing anymore secrets to the public!!



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 15 December 2010
Lyrikalstylez said:

The illuminati put him in jail because they dont want him revealing anymore secrets to the public!!


Is it sad that I can't tell if your being serious or sarcastic?



Lyrikalstylez on 15 December 2010
Kasz216 said:
Lyrikalstylez said:

The illuminati put him in jail because they dont want him revealing anymore secrets to the public!!


Is it sad that I can't tell if your being serious or sarcastic?



I see you have been brainwashed by them,



Kasz216 on 15 December 2010

I still can't tell if your sarcastic or not.

It should also be noted that the best thing that could be said about this guy from his coworkers was that

 

A) He's a male chauvinist, but he wouldn't rape anybody!  He just thinks men are better then women.  You know, because he's australian.  He definitly should step down though because he's making Wikileaks about himelf.

and

B) Wikileaks has become so politicized and bogged down in political views self promotion and products and  we feel the need to break away and make a new website that will be about the leaks and protecting sources.   Look for Openleaks soon.

 

I mean, is it really so hard to believe that this guy might not be the best guy that we should rush to his defense because he's the loudest person in an orgization that leaks government info?

It's like how everybody rushed to OJ's defense.



kirby007 on 16 December 2010

I find it funny how the sweden gorvernment cares for one dude so much while if he did what they claim he did he aint the worst out there



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.

Kasz216 on 16 December 2010
kirby007 said:

I find it funny how the sweden gorvernment cares for one dude so much while if he did what they claim he did he aint the worst out there


I can't think of much worse things that holding a woman down and forcing her to have sex with you.  (Which is what the rape charge is.)