BREAKING: UN to Free Assange, Final Ruling Says ‘Arbitrary Detention’ Must End

a reply to: goou111

This is awesome news.

Although it makes you wonder about his safety.

Where in the world could one such as Assange go where those seeking to end him could not find him.

HA!

Let's see, the UN says something and the World does the exact same thing they do every time the UN says something...nothing!

"Huh, did somebody say something????" (looking around) "Never mind, I guess it was nothing."

The UN is UN-necessary, UN-important, UN-wanted, UN-needed, UN-powerful, UN-worthy, UN-credible, UN-relevant, UN-trustworthy and UN-welcome. The UN is the ultimate evolution of bureaucracy at it's finest. The UN is powerless to do anything.

Screw the UN!

Now personally, I think Assange should be freed immediately. I further think they should rescind Obama's Nobel Prize and give it instead to Assange. Assange has done more to expose dirty politicians and avert wars for profit as a result than Obama ever will.

That said, the UN's opinion on the matter means exactly...nothing.

originally posted by: EvillerBob
Splitting hairs is a fine legal tradition, but this isn't the hair worth splitting.

If the publicity-seeking use of inaccurate emotive language doesn't succeed in changing either government's intentions, then it will indeed have been a waste of time.

originally posted by: schuyler
Is Assange actually being detained at all? Has he not holed up in the embassy and not under arrest? I realize the Bobbies are outside the door, but technically speaking, he is not in "custody" at all.

He's not in custody, hasn't been for years. If he leaves the embassy then the UK has an obligation to detain him as he is wanted by another country (Sweden) regarding crimes he is alleged to have committed. So far he has refused to come out of hiding and yet he classes himself as imprisoned and his groupies love to suggest he is an assassination target. The UK is upholding international law if it detains him and arranges extradition to Sweden while the charges against him remain.

a reply to: goou111

still no proof of life other than questionable audio that could possibly be computer generated.
I wanna see him in a video alive and talking about recent events.

Until then, I fear this card in the illuminati game card deck is a reality, and they tend to have a 100% prediction rate.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: goou111

Well damn my eyes!

That's a turn up for the books! I will be a damned sight happier about all this when he is not only free, but remains unmolested by the security services. That being said, he did make them all look like a complete shower of twits for six years, hidden in plain sight.

Amazing what the truth can do to the evil. But I doubt this man will have a moment of peace, unless it is resting in it. Clinton may have lost but still has a grudge, the DNC is in tatters and the really sick under-belly of US politics has been caught with their pants down...literally.

I wish him all the luck in the world and think he should have a prominent place in some leadership form...but my money is on him disappearing (if lucky) or DISAPPEARING if not.

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Well, quite.

I think the fact of the matter is, that as leaders go, he is currently one of many heads of a distributed network of freedom and truth advocates, whose nation of origin is not important enough to him when compared with the citizenship of the human race, for him to ever attempt to gain political power there. He is Australian, but would, likely as not, have no interest in becoming an active member of the political establishment there.

For a start, nearly all political blocs and governmental positions one could take, require one to sign certain confidentiality clauses for reasons of national security and so on. Now, I personally believe that it is immoral to sign such a thing, or recognise any instruction from a government agency that one must not talk about a thing. If one believes it is morally just to talk about a thing, then one should talk about a thing with both middle fingers up.

If there is one thing that Wikileaks has taught the world, it is that the amount of information which is kept from the public under the blanket excuse of national security, but actually has nothing to do with national security at all, is VAST, not small. Therefore, anyone who is prepared to allow a gag order to be placed upon them, either as part of a contract or by having it inflicted upon them by judge or other empowered figure, probably is not acting in the best interests of the people, or in defence of national security. I doubt he would be prepared to take governmental leadership positions for that reason.

a reply to: DISRAELI

The UK did not force him to enter the building and are not forcing him to stay there. If he walks out of the building, they will not force him to stay inside. So his present location is voluntary.

Do you understand what arbitrarily detention is. If he walks outside the embassy there is a policeman waiting to arrest him. From there he would be sent to Sweeden and from there very likely extradited to the USA. The US has on ongoing invesestagation into Wikileaks.

He is a political prisoner within the UK and his crime was publishing the truth.

This seems WAY too sped up.
I think TPTB are going with Plan B and are giving the impression of freeing him to make him an easier target. I cannot imagine what type of backlash may occur if he ends up "suicided". Anyone with any sort of knowledge on the b.s. games that TPTB play can see right thru this.

originally posted by: purplemer
Do you understand what arbitrarily detention is. If he walks outside the embassy there is a policeman waiting to arrest him.

This is an artificial (even arbitrary) definition of detention. Nobody forced him to go there, nobody is preventing him from leaving.
If he had escaped to the mountains instead, would you be saying that his life in the mountains was a "detention"?

Another country has issued a warrant, and the UK is legally obliged to act upon it.
There might even be a moral obligation to tell the U.N. that they have no power to tell the UK what to do, and invite them to visit a taxidermist.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Blaine91555

Care to share an example of information which should not have been released and lead to the death of an agent?

Because I have to say, most everything I read from Wikileaks has revealed that most National Security related blocking of information release has far more to do with covering the asses of people who have never taken a risk with their personal safety at all, than it ever does protecting assets of the US government.

The things I listed could happen and that is the point. The information Assange distributes is often the result of crimes committed by others. You accept the proceeds from a crime, you are as guilty as they are. ....and he's such a dipstick A child could see through his ruse.

Let's leave it at I think Assange is a phony who is doing what he does for the wrong reasons and his history leads me to believe he's only doing it to be the center of attention and not for any noble reason at all.

As far as the UN, it's a crap organization of cronies who pander to very bad people and no sovereign nation should ever answer to the UN and give up it's sovereignty. Why any free western democracy would even be a member is beyond me. I guess so the elite can give their nuisance cousins a place to work, which is actually just a place to hang out and drink coffee and feel important without actually having any power.

UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Current Membership of the Human Rights Council, 1 January - 31 December 2016

by regional groups
by year

COUNTRY TERM EXPIRES ON
Albania 2017
Algeria 2016
Bangladesh 2017
Belgium 2018
Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 2017
Botswana 2017
Burundi 2018
China 2016
Congo 2017
Côte d’Ivoire 2018
Cuba 2016
Ecuador 2018
El Salvador 2017
Ethiopia 2018
France 2016
Georgia 2018
Germany 2018
Ghana 2017
India 2017
Indonesia 2017
Kenya 2018
Kyrgyzstan 2018
Latvia 2017
Maldives 2016
Mexico 2016
Mongolia 2018
Morocco 2016
Namibia 2016
Netherlands 2017
Nigeria 2017
Panama 2018
Paraguay 2017
Philippines 2018
Portugal 2017
Qatar 2017
Republic of Korea 2018
Russian Federation 2016
Saudi Arabia 2016
Slovenia 2018
South Africa 2016
Switzerland 2018
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 2016
Togo 2018
United Arab Emirates 2018
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 2016
Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) 2018
Viet Nam 2016

LINK

I think that list shows the real story with the UN.

If the UN were legitimate, that list would not look like that.

a reply to: DISRAELI

Another country has issued a warrant, and the UK is legally obliged to act upon it.

Simply not the case there is an obligation by treaty from the UK to send him to Sweeden but that confilcts 1951 UN refugee convention. The second is the higher obligation of the two.

Well docuemented the smearing of Whistleblowers with sexual allegations. If you really dont want to see through the smoke thats upto you.

Cognitive Dissonance at its best

Assnage is a political prisoner being denied the right to Asylum.

Information is free.

a reply to: Blaine91555

So...theives break into a property, find a murder room, tell a dude who will talk to the cops, and hes the badguy, not the property owner he is reporting?

a reply to: Blaine91555

The things I listed could happen and that is the point. The information Assange distributes is often the result of crimes committed by others. You accept the proceeds from a crime, you are as guilty as they are. ....and he's such a dipstick A child could see through his ruse.

Yes and some of the information in the past has won wikileaks awards for jounrnalism. Depends what side of the coin you are sitting.
WL is 100 verifible objective news organisation. Why would you want to live in a world where more and more information is censored. As an informed human being you can make informed choices..

Easier to arrange just another "suicide"

a reply to: SoulSurfer

I think he's been dead opr incarcerated for at least a month. I dont belive incarceration would suit the US in Assange's situation therefore i think he's most likely dead.

Why wouldn't he just open his curtain and show the world he is right where we are told he is, like he has done countless times before. It reeks of conspiracy. Then all the weird # with the airport and Pamela Anderson visiting the embassy like WTF is going on?

Unless he still has some serious dirt and his safety is more compromised than ever.

I dont know. Its all a mess

a reply to: TrueBrit

I'm talking about hacking, a criminal act. I'm not impressed by that in any way shape or form. This is far more akin to a person who fences stolen goods, except he does it for attention. If he got no attention he would go away on his own. He's no hero.

There is no equivalency with what you asked?

Lmao! The U.N, what a disgusting group of internationalist bought and paid for pigs. They are a joke either way, when it comes down to the sovereignty of any Nation.

Any free thinking human being should recognize them as their enemy, at least until if and when they actually put their funding towards helping people all over the World like they claim.

The U.S Military, and their allies, who are we the majority of the American people, will mow down those blue helmets any day they want to try us. ~$heopleNation

a reply to: purplemer

(rhetorical question in the realm of the absurd alert )

So, no more privacy? Hacking is cool and it should be legal? We should teach our children it's OK to do that? Because hackers might trip over dirt on someone, they should have free range to do as they wish?

It can't be alright in one situation and not another. This has opened a can of worms I believe will backfire on all of us in the future. The end of privacy won't end like people think it will. Sooner or later and I think already, innocent people will be harmed. It's not OK IMO.

Awards for posting information stolen by criminals? Anyone with the resources could do that and it requires nothing special to do that. Not an award any credible person would want I'm sure. Look at me, someone sent me information they stole while committing a crime and hey, I'm clicking to upload it, I deserve an award.

Be nice now, I was smiling as I typed this.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Blaine91555

The information provided by people to Assange is the truth.

If we cannot handle the truth, then we deserve to burn in it. How long are we to call those who lie to our faces patriots, leaders, heroes and figureheads, rather than the decrepit things they are? How long are we to place a greater value on the blindfold about our eyes, than the reality which lay beyond it?

There is no truth which is uglier than the lie used to hide it, no matter how pretty the lie may appear on first comparative glance. The reason for this is simple. When you act on a lie, you work toward nothing. When you act on the truth, you work toward a noble purpose.

The more you know the truth...the more you see the lies around you