I don't necessarily think he's a good egg, honestly I don't know. However, you have to admit that the timing of the accusation was extremely suspect.

WORRIED that your teeth will be stained after a heavy night drinking red wine? Fear not; drink a bottle of white wine before going to bed, to remove the stains.

So at which time period would you consider it not suspicious for an accusation?

I would say this....If I was trying to frame Assange, I wouldn't try the very hard to prove crime of rape to do it with.

If I were unethical like that I'd find another way....Though why would I need to? He's broken enough laws as it is.

Edited by Stirlingsays (22 Feb 2013 5.54pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

The invasion of Iraq springs to mind. Your turn.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

If it broke international law, pray tell, why have there been no successful prosecutions?

Do American run the Haig by chance?

An inaccuracy continually repeated doesn't make it more true.

The truth is that they didn't break international law....They acted upon a vaguely drafted resolution which they could argue gave them the right.

No international court will convict them once that resolution was made.

Was the resolution passed with the intention of allowing the war, no....But it gave the room enough for it to happen.

That's the reality.....Not 'America broke international law'.

That's just politics.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Angry?

What on earth am I angry about? Do you characterise people who find flaws in your argument as angry?

So in your opinion the charge's only purpose is to gain extradition. You have decided upon the innocence of the man....No case to answer in your opinion...Despite never having met the man or being aware of what actually happened that night.

Also this charge has been around for a long time, way before he fled into a diplomatic building inside another country.

My point about the rape charge doesn't miss the point at all. It's a hard crime to prove, look at the statistics on successful convictions. If this is a plot it isn't a very good one in terms of gaining a conviction. Unless a conviction is gained what use is the charge?

But lets consider the logic if it is a plot to get Assange to Sweden....He goes to Sweden.....As you believe it's a false charge, so there's no actual proof or rape, just sex.

Once he's released, what are you proposing? That he's kipnapped by the Americans from a European country?

You've already decided it's a trumped up charge from the comfort of your armchair.

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't......That's what a court exists for.

Edited by Stirlingsays (22 Feb 2013 8.11pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

It's ok fruitcake, I'm enjoying picking the raisins out of your spongey argument....Happy as a daisy.

As I said previously to Kermie, what time period would you regard as not strange?

You appear to believe that there isn't much validity to the charges yet seem dead set against Assange answering them. As I've said, if they are so weak what is there to fear.

Where is the past evidence that the Swedish legal system isn't robust and fair?

Again, you fail to answer the point that if the charges are made up why would a framing organisation choose such a hard crime to convict on?

The conviction on rape is so low as too mean this charge won't fly....unless there is physical proof or reasonable corroborated evidence

Finally, this point about the charge being designed to disrupt the Wikileaks website.....What are you talking about? The site is run by a team, not Assange on his own. He has been all over the world for years not stuck in a room with web developers and researchers. He uses the tools of the web to communicate....Blimey anyone with a basic understanding of how web development and site management works knows that it isn't location dependent....If his team need to talk to him there hasn't been any change to how it was before he was charged and swanning off doing interviews beforehand.

Like I say, I have no opinion on whether he's guilty or innocent but I don't buy this....The world has to operate differently for Assange crap.

He's cost us three million, this joker is someone's elses problem and I'm fed up with him......He's already proved he's a liar by his comments to courts on flight....Taken money from backers who spoke up for him and are now out of pocket.

140, 000 bail it was......The judge very kindly reduced it to 93, 000.....But he said he had sympathy for their well intentions despite their gullibility.

Edited by Stirlingsays (22 Feb 2013 9.40pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)