Julian Assange arrest warrant upheld by court

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: Jay-morris
You are not listening!

Oh you poor thing. I am listening. I just don't think alleged rapists should escape their time in court.

No! You are not listening. This is not about rape, this is about hate. Simple as that. You have ignored my points! Do not say you have not, because you blatantly have!

Okay, please answer me this! I am going to use jimmy saville as an example again. How did he get away with all those decades of child abuse, when the BBC knew, the police knew, nurses in children's homes knew, celebs knew.

Where was this so called guiding light justice system you keep on mentioning? And before you say different country, that makes no difference at all.

So how did he get away with it?

originally posted by: Jay-morris
At the end of the day, the messages prove he is innocent, and also prove that the powers that be had something to do with this. So why would he go back there for a trail.

Would you? I do not think So!

You are clueless to the law which is why your arguments fail. How the items were obtained is very much relevant. Your level of willful ignorance is why you are incapable of understanding this conversation.

As for your NTAC 2.0 compliant asinine question I wouldn't have raped 2 women to get me into the issues in the first place.

originally posted by: Jay-morris
No! You are not listening. This is not about rape, this is about hate. Simple as that.

Er, you think it's about hate. Not sure why.

I think it's about legal process to get Assange to resolve the rape allegations and prove his innocence, or not. Before that, he'll have to answer for the offence of skipping bail in the UK.

Also, trying to compare Assange to Saville is apples and oranges. Stick to the issue in hand.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Jay-morris
At the end of the day, the messages prove he is innocent, and also prove that the powers that be had something to do with this. So why would he go back there for a trail.

Would you? I do not think So!

You are clueless to the law which is why your arguments fail. How the items were obtained is very much relevant. Your level of willful ignorance is why you are incapable of understanding this conversation.

As for your NTAC 2.0 compliant asinine question I wouldn't have raped 2 women to get me into the issues in the first place.

Oh so he did rape two women now, not might?. You are moaning about me saying he did not, but then you say this, even though evidence points to he did not, and evidence points to another agenda.

Your agenda is quite clear here. You want him to be guilty, you hope he is guilty. People like you, you just cannot debate with because you cannot see passed your own hatred.

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: Jay-morris
No! You are not listening. This is not about rape, this is about hate. Simple as that.

Er, you think it's about hate. Not sure why.

I think it's about legal process to get Assange to resolve the rape allegations and prove his innocence, or not. Before that, he'll have to answer for the offence of skipping bail in the UK.

Also, trying to compare Assange to Saville is apples and oranges. Stick to the issue in hand.

If you cannot see why i brought up the Savile case, then there is really no point you being on this thread. It is not apples and oranges, it's about people being protected, being above the so called legal process you are in love with.

Seriously! You cannot see my point here!?

a reply to: Jay-morris

Assange already admitted he had sex with both women.

The difference is he said it was consensual and they said it was not.

But you keep grasping at straws.

a reply to: Jay-morris

Did Seville commit his crime s in Sweden? If not then they arent comparable. Just like Assanges failed attempt to use UK law to get out of his Sweden issues, it wont work.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Jay-morris

Assange already admitted he had sex with both women.

The difference is he said it was consensual and they said it was not.

But you keep grasping at straws.

And again, the messages clearly show that is was consensual, but you like throwing the "he raped" words around. If it makes you feel better, and justifies this weird hatred you have with him, then whatever rocks the boat

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Jay-morris

Did Seville commit his crime s in Sweden? If not then they arent comparable. Just like Assanges failed attempt to use UK law to get out of his Sweden issues, it wont work.

Seriously! are you thst? Can't you see why i brought up the Savile case, even though I have pretty much explained it more than once! Hence the reason why I said it does not matter what country you are in!

a reply to: Jay-morris

Hence the reason we use a court with a judge and not the court of public opinion.

originally posted by: Jay-morris

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Jay-morris

Did Seville commit his crime s in Sweden? If not then they arent comparable. Just like Assanges failed attempt to use UK law to get out of his Sweden issues, it wont work.

Seriously! are you thst? Can't you see why i brought up the Savile case, even though I have pretty much explained it more than once! Hence the reason why I said it does not matter what country you are in!

I assumed you brought it up because you dont understand how the different legal systems work. The same problem seems to apply to assange as well given he already tried, and failed, to make the same bs argument you are trying to make. Feel free to cite a similar case for Sweden.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Jay-morris

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Jay-morris

Did Seville commit his crime s in Sweden? If not then they arent comparable. Just like Assanges failed attempt to use UK law to get out of his Sweden issues, it wont work.

Seriously! are you thst? Can't you see why i brought up the Savile case, even though I have pretty much explained it more than once! Hence the reason why I said it does not matter what country you are in!

I assumed you brought it up because you dont understand how the different legal systems work. The same problem seems to apply to assange as well given he already tried, and failed, to make the same bs argument you are trying to make. Feel free to cite a similar case for Sweden.

No! I guess you do not know why i brought up Savile Maybe read again! But I think it will still go over your head

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Jay-morris

Hence the reason we use a court with a judge and not the court of public opinion.

Sigh!

originally posted by: Jay-morris
No! I guess you do not know why i brought up Savile

You bought up Saville as a distraction. The Assange situation is nothing like Saville: Except we have learnt nothing if Assange does not address the allegations of rape, because then he's like Saville - an abuser escaping justice. Turn a blind eye, just like with Saville.

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: Jay-morris
No! I guess you do not know why i brought up Savile

You bought up Saville as a distraction. The Assange situation is nothing like Saville: Except we have learnt nothing if Assange does not address the allegations of rape, because then he's like Saville - an abuser escaping justice. Turn a blind eye, just like with Saville.

Savile was above the law, he was protected. So, courts, law, justice system means nothing when you are powerful and influential. There were people protecting saville, people who are very powerful.

You really think this is just a UK thing lol. You think the powers that be cannot manipulate in other countries? Are you that gullible?

Savile is a perfect example that you cannot trust the justice system, no matter where you are.

There is s reason why all this about saville hit the media after he died.

Does that sound corrupt to you?

originally posted by: Jay-morris
Savile was above the law..

Isn't that what Assange is trying to do? Place himself above the law by frustrating due process and pleading that he's "special". Thereby being the same as Saville. You really need to go and find another example to distract away from the core elements of this debate.

As Judge Emma Arbuthnot said in her recent ruling against Assange's attempt to cancel his UK criminal offence, thus escaping English law.

58. I have found above that Mr Assange’s failure to surrender has impeded the course of justice and has led finally to the case being dropped as it cannot be continued unless he returned to Sweden. I find Mr Assange’s failure is a determined attempt to avoid the order of the court, an order which was considered by the Supreme Court in this jurisdiction.

60. The impression I have, and this may well be dispelled if and when Mr Assange finally appears in court, is that he is a man who wants to impose his terms on the course of justice, whether the course of justice is in this jurisdiction or in Sweden. He appears to consider himself above the normal rules of law and wants justice only if it goes in his favour. As long as the court process is going his way, he is willing to be bailed conditionally but as soon as the Supreme Court rules against him, he no longer wants to participate on the court’s terms but on his terms.

Source Ruling 2

Do you think the Judge is corrupt? Perhaps took a bribe from the CIA? You seem to think the whole justice system is corrupt to the core. How about the seven judges who considered his appeal to the UK Supreme Court?

a reply to: paraphi

Isn't that what Assange is trying to do? Place himself above the law by frustrating due process and pleading that he's "special". Thereby being the same as Saville. You really need to go and find another example to distract away from the core elements of this debate. 

As Judge Emma Arbuthnot said in her recent ruling against Assange's attempt to cancel his UK criminal offence, thus escaping English law. 

Seriously! Even after all I have said, you are still confused about the Savile example! Ok, one more time!

Savile was above the law because he was protected. Which means while he was alive, he would never be arrested. So, the people who were protecting him were above the law. They can decide who is guilty, or not.

Loom at the Savile case, and you see this time and time again. Suddenly, when he does, all if it comes out! He was protected because he knew very powerful people who were part of his ring. With him dead, these people did not have to worry about him naming names.

So, I am sure you are not gullible enough to think that this is just happening in the UK, thus evil corruption.

Going by the messages, we know he is innocent, and we know the victims were pressured. Pressured by who? And why pressured to lie?

And you think he should go there for a fair trail lol

If the powers that be can keep Savile safe, no matter how terrible the crimes, they can put someone away too.

Who? Take your pick! He has pi##ed off a lot of sociopaths, so the list will be long!