Julian Assange

I just feel that governments, US and ours, are probably doing the best they can under extreme circumstances. Nothing is ever going to snowy white, not where evil regimes, terrorism, and the like are concerned.

I don't think wikileaks help in any way. It must be easy for them to put stuff up on the internet. They have not got the responsibility of protecting societies, and they weren't the victims of the dreadful atrocities we and the US have had to put up with. Evil people breed evil deeds.

It's terrible when innocent people are harmed, whatever race they belong to.

Well, I don't want you deleting anything for my sake. You carry on.

(I don't read long posts )

Best you don't know JO4 ; interesting that you comment in a throw-away remark and not on the serious content of my post. And, no, it wasn't a swear word, more of an expletive.

Love the funny 'confused' faces.

"But the virulence of British media hostility towards the WikiLeaks founder is now unrelenting"

I say it again. It's because he looks such a twerp.

Just read the Guardian article.

I find myself agreeing with everything in it. It's exactly what I've been thinking for weeks but couldn't have articulated it anywhere near as well.

Well Nanadogsbody, I don't know what your "obvious reasons" for deleting your post was.

And if that was a swear word at the end, again

Thank you Annobel. I think that article puts the other side of the argument clearly. As you say it creates balance..at last.

In the interests of balance, here's an article from the Guardian on line:
www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/21/why-us-is-out-to-get-assange

Thanks petallus. And JO4 I posted knowing my remarks would not be "well received by the majority" given the trend of the conversation so far, so that is patently not the case.

I had written a much longer post but have deleted most of it for obvious reasons?£@:*^+%!!

Nice one jo4

Assange and the President of Ecuador made friends when slagging off the United States while broadcasting in Russia. Ecuador and Russia are both deeply corrupt states with a powerful and corrosive control over their media. Assange made an oblique comparison of his situation with that of Pussy Riot (is that the correct name?) in his Juliet moment, suggesting that he was being persecuted in the same way as they have been. Quite what persecution he has suffered wasn't revealed. He also claimed to have been under house arrest and, while it is true that he was under curfew while on bail, his so-called house arrest didn't prevent him from travelling to the Ecuadorean Embassy in Knightsbridge.

I repeat that I have no idea whether he is guilty of sexual assault and rape. He is, however, a master of distorting the truth when it affects him – as well as revealing it when it affects others.

I still don't under stand why the American documents are called cables. Is it just tradition?

or Cari of course!

I don't hate him. I don't think he's worth that.

Perhaps no one should make any comments on here unless they agree with the original poster, and are sure they are going to be well received by the majority?

Maybe Josie or Geraldine could enlighten me on that point as I'm finding it a bit difficult to judge when I am ok in posting.

Nanadogsbody thank heavens for your well thought out and unbiased post. I agree with everything you say.

Also agree with Greatnan that just because someone is innocent certainly doesn't mean you have nothing to fear, especially if you have been whistle blowing again the USA.

There are so many posts on this thread which are hating and derogatory based on little more than the looks of the man or some sixth sense about his character (presumably since none of us have met him only based on media representations).

PS effbinder don't especially believe everything the David Allen Green writes as 'fact'. He is a solicitor, works for a media company and was formerly the Treasury Solicitor! No vested interests of course.

Well said Faye , nice that some people don't believe everything that the media throw up.

Did I say any of that? I think not. I simply asked the questions 'what if?'

Unfortunately the Australian government does not look out for its own people. Two Australians were tortured at Guantanmo, while the government knew and did nothing. I don't agree with every thing Assanges is said to have done but then I also don't believe everything the media publishes either. I read ages ago that he did in fact make himself available to the authorities in Sweden before he left but all was fine then. I do like the idea of Wikileaks, hopefully it will keep governments a bit more honest. They are supposed to be working for us but I get the feeling we are all just plebs to them anyway! I believe our rights are gradually being eroded!

Nanadogsbody - it sounds like you are suggesting that just because Assange hasn't sexually assaulted anybody else as far as we know, he's probably not guilty. It's possible to commit a crime for the first time, and each case should be judged on its own merits.

As to your second point about him knowing he is innocent being a good reason for him not to stand trial... I can't quite understand it.

Not wanting to stand trial doesn't seem to have any bearing on whether you're guilty or not - if you're guilty you would also not want to stand trial as then you would (hopefully) be found guilty. Knowing his own innocence is not good enough. That is not how justice works.

I know this has already been posted, but I'd like to recommend this article again: www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2012/08/legal-myths-about-assange-extradition

I don't judge a book by its cover and I try not to be influenced by how a person looks. Julian Assange is Australian. Since working for Wikileaks he has lived all round the world. His work for Wikileaks has shown him just how unscrupulous governments are. He has received numerous awards including such reputable organisations such as Amnesty International.

Then Wikileaks publishes information various governments around the world would rather we didn't know. Details of massacres, toxic dumps, etc. We see how the US disregards it's own laws in the treatment of one of the whistleblowers. Next charges of sexual assault are levelled against him in Sweden.

When the head of the IMF was accused of raping a hispanic chambermaid it was somehow found there was no case to answer. Then it emerged he was known as a sexual predator with other outstanding cases against him and ...some of these were high-powered woman, not just 'mere' chambermaids.

My point is firstly, why have no other assaults come to light if he is in the habit of forcing himself on women and secondly, if he truly knows he is not guilty of these assaults then no wonder he is not going back to face charges.

There seems to be a 'hate' campaign going on here against Assange. I don't know if he is guilty as charged. I don't know if he should go back to face charges. And yes, greatnan it is naive to believe that 'if you are innocent you have nothing to fear'.

Galloway and Assange deserve each other, to my mind. no, I'm not judgmental, not even a tiny bit.......

I presume he sought sanctuary with Ecuador because he knows how they hate the US.
I am not a believer in the 'If you are innocent you have nothing to fear' mantra - too many miscarriages of justice have been revealed, sometimes too late to save the life of a wrongly convicted person.

I think you'll find POGS that Australia has something to say on the matter as Assange is an Australian national.

When I say I can't stand the man it has nothing to do with his looks. We all develop our own ways of 'reading' people throughout our lives, deciding who to trust and who to keep at arms length. Having taught schoolchildren for over twenty years does expose one ample opportunities of testing these skills. I can't stand Assange because I mistrust his demeanor, his words and his actions.

Nice to see Galloway getting a bit of stick.