Foot in Mouth Syndrome II
Have you ever said something and wished the ground would open up and swallow you? Tell us your tales of social embarrassment.
Thanks to BraynDedd for the suggestion
( , Thu 16 Aug 2012, 14:12)
Have you ever said something and wished the ground would open up and swallow you? Tell us your tales of social embarrassment.
Thanks to BraynDedd for the suggestion
( , Thu 16 Aug 2012, 14:12)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread
The United States government has stated
that they reserve the right to treat people they perceive as enemies however they like.
They've also stated that they see Assange as an enemy.
There's reasonable doubt that, if he goes to Sweden, he won't be extradited to the US and treated as an enemy.
Therefore he shouldn't be extradited to Sweden.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:39, 3 replies)
that they reserve the right to treat people they perceive as enemies however they like.
They've also stated that they see Assange as an enemy.
There's reasonable doubt that, if he goes to Sweden, he won't be extradited to the US and treated as an enemy.
Therefore he shouldn't be extradited to Sweden.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:39, 3 replies)
There's also reasonable doubt that he would get extradited.
What with the US not having made any extradition requests and all that.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:45, closed)
What with the US not having made any extradition requests and all that.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:45, closed)
That's not how reasonable doubt works.
Reasonable doubt should be resolved in favour of the accused.
"He might not be being fitted up" isn't a valid counter-argument to "he might be being fitted up."
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:02, closed)
Reasonable doubt should be resolved in favour of the accused.
"He might not be being fitted up" isn't a valid counter-argument to "he might be being fitted up."
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:02, closed)
There is no reason to suggest he's being fitted up unless you're a tinfoil hat wearing loon.
How's that?
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 17:36, closed)
How's that?
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 17:36, closed)
They should have got the third little pig to build them instead.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:15, closed)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:15, closed)
Except for that whole thing where they won't extradite someone who faces capital punishment.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:52, closed)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:52, closed)
or extradite him without a fight, what with Sweden being a notorious US puppet
or, as AB so right points out, extradite him at all, since THE US HASN'T ASKED TO...... arrgggghh.
It's like banging your head against a wall made of tinfoil-coated retard, B_D
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:57, closed)
or, as AB so right points out, extradite him at all, since THE US HASN'T ASKED TO...... arrgggghh.
It's like banging your head against a wall made of tinfoil-coated retard, B_D
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:57, closed)
so are you saying its impossible for the US to ask for extraditon after Assange is in sweden?
If so, that could be the deal breaker.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:01, closed)
If so, that could be the deal breaker.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:01, closed)
No, but it's hugely unlikely that they'll be told yes.
www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2012/08/legal-myths-about-assange-extradition
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:06, closed)
www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2012/08/legal-myths-about-assange-extradition
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:06, closed)
It's ALMOST like I didn't post that article just up there
right at the start of this shenanigans.
And it's ALMOST as if that article doesn't contain direct links to the court transcripts in question that apeloverage was demanding.
Which would suggest it's ALMOST as if people were arguing half-baked incoherencies blindly in the face of straight-up evidence that they are being idiots.
I'm starting to have some sympathy for Rory here, I have to say.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:17, closed)
right at the start of this shenanigans.
And it's ALMOST as if that article doesn't contain direct links to the court transcripts in question that apeloverage was demanding.
Which would suggest it's ALMOST as if people were arguing half-baked incoherencies blindly in the face of straight-up evidence that they are being idiots.
I'm starting to have some sympathy for Rory here, I have to say.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:17, closed)
Shall I call someone Hitler and we can just draw a line under the whole thing?
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:19, closed)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:19, closed)
It's not impossible to extradite anyone from anywhere
if the countries share an extradition agreement. however there is absolutely nothing, legally, that would make it easier to extradite him from Sweden than the UK, which is where he already was. In fact, it would be twice as hard, as it stands, as if he were in Sweden he would need to be extradited from both the UK AND Sweden.
So, his argument that if he goes to Sweden he is at risk is rubbish, he's at less risk than he was in the UK.
And he can't be extradited to face the death penalty at all, from either country, so that's just complete bollocks.
And anyway, no one has asked to extradite him. Which is kind of a crucial flaw.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:12, closed)
if the countries share an extradition agreement. however there is absolutely nothing, legally, that would make it easier to extradite him from Sweden than the UK, which is where he already was. In fact, it would be twice as hard, as it stands, as if he were in Sweden he would need to be extradited from both the UK AND Sweden.
So, his argument that if he goes to Sweden he is at risk is rubbish, he's at less risk than he was in the UK.
And he can't be extradited to face the death penalty at all, from either country, so that's just complete bollocks.
And anyway, no one has asked to extradite him. Which is kind of a crucial flaw.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:12, closed)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread