Assange to go!

In October, the Australian-born WikiLeaks founder had complained Ecuador was violating his "fundamental rights" and he was living in an "inhuman situation". He took the claim to an Ecuadorian court but it was thrown out.

Mr Assange had claimed new asylum terms forcing him to pay for medical bills, laundry and phone calls and to clean up after his pet cat violate his rights and are meant to coerce him into ending his asylum.
Click to expand...
I assume that amongst his few remaining human rights was always the right to leave the Ecuadorian Embassy - taking his defecating cat with him?
 
LOL, the thread on Wikileaks' Twitter feed is an absolute riot. Dozens of people lining up to give Assange a good kicking! :D

1.png


7.png


5.png


4.png


3.png


2.png


6.png
 
We've had no charges levelled against this man.

Posters in here have bleated he will not be extradited. The issue is: It's not them facing a possible consequence.

He is targeted solely due to the fact he released information that was extremely damaging to those in power. There used to be a word for it... Journalist... But that's long since gone out of fashion and all we are left with is leftist activists.

While we are on the subject of "law" (the topic that only applies to certain people), what about multiple UN rulings that state he should be allowed to leave unimpeded and be compensated? Does that ruling not apply?
 
RaohNS said:
We've had no charges levelled against this man.

Posters in here have bleated he will not be extradited. The issue is: It's not them facing a possible consequence.

He is targeted solely due to the fact he released information that was extremely damaging to those in power. There used to be a word for it... Journalist... But that's long since gone out of fashion and all we are left with is leftist activists.

While we are on the subject of "law" (the topic that only applies to certain people), what about multiple UN rulings that state he should be allowed to leave unimpeded and be compensated? Does that ruling not apply?
Click to expand...

So you think a mainstream paper would have released all these docs if they were handed to them as they were to wikileaks?
 
RaohNS said:
We've had no charges levelled against this man.
Click to expand...

He's literally been hiding in the embassy to avoid a fair trial on the rape charges levelled against him. That's why he broke bail in the first place.

While we are on the subject of "law" (the topic that only applies to certain people), what about multiple UN rulings that state he should be allowed to leave unimpeded and be compensated? Does that ruling not apply?
Click to expand...

I assume your referring to this silliness ( https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=17012&LangID=E )? Because the Working Group doesn't make legal binding rulings and the laws requiring his arrest are actual laws, that's why (and just as well because it's also that ruling is one of the dumbest bits of reasoning I've ever read).
 
Mr Jack said:
He's literally been hiding in the embassy to avoid a fair trial on the rape charges levelled against him. That's why he broke bail in the first place.
Click to expand...

Wrong (again), there has never been a charge for rape. He sought asylum as he was worried Sweden would extradite to the US. The argument from people (quite possibly you too) was that Sweden don't extradite to the US. Then it was proven that Sweden does extradite to the US (in fact in nearly every case they did so).


I assume your referring to this silliness ( https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=17012&LangID=E )? Because the Working Group doesn't make legal binding rulings and the laws requiring his arrest are actual laws, that's why (and just as well because it's also that ruling is one of the dumbest bits of reasoning I've ever read).
Click to expand...

Really:
International Human Rights Law said:
The opinions of the WG are legally binding to the extent that they are based on BINDING international human rights LAWS, such as the international covenant on civil and political rights
Click to expand...

So some rules don't apply... But others do... Sounds quite arbitrary that Jack, but from someone wrong twice in one post I expect nothing less ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom