Visit the Archives for U.S. Politics Online -- U.S. Politics Online . net


Is speaking the truth a crime that should be prosecuted?
The question is: Is Julian Assange to be blamed for telling the truth or the governments who tried to hide it from own citizens?
Nobody is prosecuting him for "speaking the truth".
But since you're interested in people being jailed for speaking, here's one right in your own backyard: BBC News - China activist Liu Xianbin jailed for 10 years
Go speak out on behalf of Mr. Liu Xianbin and see if you don't end up in the cell next to him. Or on the execution bus....
“Well, congratulations, President Barack Obama, Conspiracy theorists who generally can survive in anaerobic environments have just had an algae bloom dropped on their fucking heads, thus removing the last arrow in your pro-governance quiver: skepticism about your opponents.” - Jon Stewart


Well it is well known that the "sex crime" against Assange was from two women who admittedly had consensual sex with him. It's about the use, or not use of a condom. This is totally political. If America wants Assange, then charge him and try to extradite him to America. If you want to charge, try, and execute Assange, then do it openly.
Last edited by leetang; 08-17-2012 at 07:23 PM.


The fact is that America wants Assange dead or alive, preferably alive because they delight in torture.
First and foremost, they want revenge. They can't handle the fact that their secrets have been exposed.
Secondly, they need to know that he can't expose them further. Like others have said, there is just so much more dirt on America that they need to protect it and they'll go to any length to do it.









“Well, congratulations, President Barack Obama, Conspiracy theorists who generally can survive in anaerobic environments have just had an algae bloom dropped on their fucking heads, thus removing the last arrow in your pro-governance quiver: skepticism about your opponents.” - Jon Stewart









Not quite:
"The declassified diplomatic cables, released under freedom of information legislation, show Australia's ambassador, the former Labor leader Kim Beazley, has made high level representations to the US government asking for advance warning of any moves to prosecute Assange.
Briefings for the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, and Senator Carr also suggest the Australian government has no in-principle objection to extradition".
"The question of advance warning of any prosecution or extradition moves was previously raised by Australian diplomats in December 2010 when they first confirmed that Assange was the target of what US Justice Department officials described as an "unprecedented'' investigation.
The Australians on that occasion explained that the advance warning would be appreciated ''so that ministers could respond appropriately''.
Read more: US intends to chase Assange, cables show







If a man were behind four months on his mortgage and was talking to you about his plans to build an addition on his home you would think him daft and delusional. But in Washington, ignoring a current crisis to discuss grand dreams is called “boldness” and “vision.”











This is another proof that US wants Assange dead or life:
What the New York Times Won't Tell You About Julian Assange | MyFDL
"Here’s the New York Times’ hit piece on the decision. I challenge you, dear reader, to go over this piece and see if any mention is made of the following key and pertinent facts:
– Ecuador invited Sweden to come to the Embassy and interview Assange, or to talk with him via teleconferencing, which is something the Swedish justice system is set up to do routinely. The Swedes refused.
– Ecuador tried to get Sweden to guarantee they would not extradite Assange to the US to face espionage charges. The Swedes refused.
– Assange himself has offered to go to Sweden immediately if they would guarantee that he would not be extradited to the US on espionage charges. The Swedes refused."
The question is why of those refusals?
Bookmarks