ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Julian Assange

Reply
Old 15th April 2019, 06:32 AM   #1041
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
No it's absolutely positively the Swedish equivalent to the criminal offence he was charged with by the grand jury in the US. Hacking, spreading viruses, ddos attacks are examples of acts that constitute a crime under that offence. This includes unlawfully accessing data on an computer system.
The boldest claim made in this thread yet. Surely you must be a Swedish attorney specializing in international law?

Quote:
The second he touches down in Sweden, instead of trying him for his criminal charges, he'd be sent off to the US?
No. What are you talking about? The US need do nothing while Assange is tied up. Strategically (and I don't get why everyone keeps ignoring this), the States want to wait as long as humanly possible to nab him. Keep him under detention consecutively as long as possible. The US is not throwing him in a gulag or executing him. We are not like that.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 07:17 AM   #1042
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,099
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
The boldest claim made in this thread yet. Surely you must be a Swedish attorney specializing in international law?
First of all, the term you should be using is "comparative law" because "international law" is something completely different. Secondly, there's no requirement to be an expert in anything. Based on the criminal allegations made by the DoJ, there's no other criminal offence that's applicable.

It would certainly not be falling under fraud simply because they don't even mention anything about monetary gain and loss, which is a prerequisite for a criminal act to be considered fraud.

Quote:
No. What are you talking about? The US need do nothing while Assange is tied up. Strategically (and I don't get why everyone keeps ignoring this), the States want to wait as long as humanly possible to nab him. Keep him under detention consecutively as long as possible. The US is not throwing him in a gulag or executing him. We are not like that.
So i guess by going into self-imposed exile in the Ecuadorian embassy he really did exactly what the Americans wanted? I still don't see what your point is, except somehow trying rationalize his behavior.
__________________
Freedom you all want, you want freedom. Why then do you haggle over a more or less? Freedom can only be the whole of freedom; a piece of freedom is not freedom. You despair of the possibility of obtaining the whole of freedom, freedom from everything - yes, you consider it insanity even to wish this? - Well, then leave off chasing after the phantom, and spend your pains on something better than the - unattainable. - Max Stirner
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 07:36 AM   #1043
ahhell
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,195
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Australia doesn't - or, at least, not when the US is doing the asking.
What reason to you have to believe this?
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 07:44 AM   #1044
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,170
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Assange's concern was exactly what happened.
Not unless he's stuck in a time loop it isn't.

And it's weird to say that was his "concern", since the evidence is pretty clear that he wasn't concerned about that at all.

Quote:
One foot out in the streets and suddenly the US pulls a sealed indictment out of their back pocket.
Nope.

He set foot on the streets of Sweden, and the US did nothing. He was brought in by Swedish authorities, and the US did nothing. He sent foot on the streets of the UK, and the US did nothing. He was brought in by UK authorities, and the US did nothing.

Quote:
It happened in the UK, because he didn't go to Sweden. Had he gone to Sweden, a similar ending would have been inevitable, in his view.
Not in 2010 it wouldn't.

Eight years later, and after two regime changes in two countries, and the situation is a little different. You're trying to traduce a change of circumstance, years after the fact, into "right all along". All of the actual evidence is actually in favor of "lying all along".

---

The biggest problem with your narrative is that it fails to explain why, if Assange was concerned that the UK would extradite him the moment he set foot there, he went from Sweden to the UK in the first place. It also fails to explain why, if he was concerned that a similar thing would happen in Sweden, he sought residency there to begin with.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 08:53 AM   #1045
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
First of all, the term you should be using is "comparative law" because "international law" is something completely different. Secondly, there's no requirement to be an expert in anything. Based on the criminal allegations made by the DoJ, there's no other criminal offence that's applicable.
Disagreed, I think it is likely to be considerably more complex, especially factoring in the intent of the hacking and its likely results. But neither here nor there. 'Absolutely, positively' is not a call you or I could make.

Quote:
It would certainly not be falling under fraud simply because they don't even mention anything about monetary gain and loss, which is a prerequisite for a criminal act to be considered fraud.
Disagreed again, based on the reading. But you could also argue that Wikileaks did stand to financially gain, being publishers. Again, neither here nor there.

Quote:
So i guess by going into self-imposed exile in the Ecuadorian embassy he really did exactly what the Americans wanted? I still don't see what your point is, except somehow trying rationalize his behavior.
If you are going employ the Rule of So, please show due respects.

It worked to US advantage, if that's what you mean. Gave the States time to prepare while Assange went nowhere.

My point is the same as I have been arguing for lo these many pages: I believe he was quite sincere in believing the US wanted his lily white ass in a big way, and intended to nab him via a sealed indictment at first opportunity. I imagine that when he left Sweden, the indictment was not ready, as the events were recent. The charges they ultimately got him on specifically referred to activities in 2010-11.

But this point is no longer relevant. Sweden is not on the table right now. My best guess is that the UK has first dibs, which will be minimized, and the US right behind them. We'll see.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 08:56 AM   #1046
Wudang
BOFH
 
Wudang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: People's Republic of South Yorkshire
Posts: 11,556
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
It also fails to explain why, if he was concerned that a similar thing would happen in Sweden, he sought residency there to begin with.
https://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/m...julian-assange

Scroll down to the heading "The Process to Date" - links in article
Quote:
In July 2010, Assange explained in a TED talk why Sweden was attractive to Wikileaks (see here at 0.20). It would appear that Wikileaks was at that time hosted in Sweden to take advantage of its liberal protections for the media and journalists. In August 2010 Wikileaks itself promoted a story in Reuters which described Sweden as a “legal shield” – their tweet is here.
__________________
"Your deepest pools, like your deepest politicians and philosophers, often turn out more shallow than expected." Walter Scott.
Wudang is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 09:08 AM   #1047
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Not unless he's stuck in a time loop it isn't.

And it's weird to say that was his "concern", since the evidence is pretty clear that he wasn't concerned about that at all.
He has been consistent that his primary concern was a pretext for the US to nab him outside the country. That was his concern in 2010, that was his concern last week. It happened.


Quote:
Nope.

He set foot on the streets of Sweden, and the US did nothing. He was brought in by Swedish authorities, and the US did nothing. He sent foot on the streets of the UK, and the US did nothing. He was brought in by UK authorities, and the US did nothing.
All addressed repeatedly. When he was in Sweden, and when first arriving in the UK, things were still biz as usual. The red flags weren't up yet. And the States had no reason to pounce, but instead could casually cross their T's while Assange was tied up. You seem to keep forgetting that Collateral Murder was released in April of 2010, the Afghan logs in July of '10, and the Iraq dump in October '10. The events in Sweden were unfolding in August and September of 2010. The States would have still been putting their case together when he was in Sweden. He didn't want to be in custody when they secured the indictment, I imagine, and due to the odd treatment he believed that he was receiving, he thought it may have been a stall tactic to keep him in reach and not wandering the globe.


Quote:
Not in 2010 it wouldn't.

Eight years later, and after two regime changes in two countries, and the situation is a little different. You're trying to traduce a change of circumstance, years after the fact, into "right all along". All of the actual evidence is actually in favor of "lying all along".
It is a little different, yes, but with exactly the same charges he feared back then. Coincidence, I'm sure.

---

Quote:
The biggest problem with your narrative is that it fails to explain why, if Assange was concerned that the UK would extradite him the moment he set foot there, he went from Sweden to the UK in the first place. It also fails to explain why, if he was concerned that a similar thing would happen in Sweden, he sought residency there to begin with.
Explained, and repeatedly. See above for the greatest hits. Again. I just went back and highlighted it for you. You're welcome.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 09:12 AM   #1048
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,170
Originally Posted by Wudang View Post
https://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/m...julian-assange

Scroll down to the heading "The Process to Date" - links in article
That is not the TED talk of a man who's concerned Sweden will extradite him the moment he sets foot on Swedish streets.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 09:18 AM   #1049
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,170
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
He has been consistent that his primary concern was a pretext for the US to nab him outside the country. That was his concern in 2010, that was his concern last week. It happened.
He has been consistent that the rape charges in Sweden were such a pretext. But that's not what happened. When the US finally did come after him, they used no pretext at all. Nor was such a pretext necessary in 2010. When the US did not come after him.

What happened in 2019 was not what he said was happening in 2010. The only way your story works is if a time portal opens up in his UK jail cell tomorrow, and whisks him back to a bedroom in Sweden in 2010. There, a CIA deep cover agent, masquerading as a Wikileaks fangirl, is stealthily guiding his naked john thomas into her double-crossing mary jane. But this time around, maybe he'll be able to break the loop and rejoin the rest of us in Linear Time.

Well, most of the rest of us, anyway.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 09:18 AM   #1050
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
That is not the TED talk of a man who's concerned Sweden will extradite him the moment he sets foot on Swedish streets.
Check the date and start reading the posts. At the time of that TED talk, the Iraq and Afghanistan leaks had barely hit the shelves. He had no reason to worry yet, as he surely knew it would take some time to prove a case.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 09:28 AM   #1051
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
He has been consistent that the rape charges in Sweden were such a pretext. But that's not what happened. When the US finally did come after him, they used no pretext at all. Nor was such a pretext necessary in 2010. When the US did not come after him.

What happened in 2019 was not what he said was happening in 2010. The only way your story works is if a time portal opens up in his UK jail cell tomorrow, and whisks him back to a bedroom in Sweden in 2010. There, a CIA deep cover agent, masquerading as a Wikileaks fangirl, is stealthily guiding his naked john thomas into her double-crossing mary jane. But this time around, maybe he'll be able to break the loop and rejoin the rest of us in Linear Time.

Well, most of the rest of us, anyway.
I see you are back to snipping out posts that interfere with your narrative, and now resort to strawmen.

When he was in Sweden, then off to the UK, he was not unduly worried. When the odd Swedish prosecution started, his antenna went up and his concern ramped up. I get this, even if in hindsight it was probably wrong. I think his attorneys could have put up a stong fight that any claim the States had on Assange was political in nature, and Sweden might agree. But I can certainly sympathize with his desire to not find out the hard way.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 09:44 AM   #1052
Wudang
BOFH
 
Wudang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: People's Republic of South Yorkshire
Posts: 11,556
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
When he was in Sweden, then off to the UK, he was not unduly worried. When the odd Swedish prosecution started, his antenna went up and his concern ramped up.
There is nothing "odd" about his prosecution. The case against him has been heard in several UK and Swedish courts and all have found he has a case to answer. Usual caveat: "case to answer" - defence still to be heard.

eta: From the agreed facts document

Quote:
11. Meanwhile, on 27th August 2010, the counsel for SW and AA appealedthe Chief Prosecutor’s decision to a Senior Prosecutor in Goteborg. On 1st September 2010, that prosecutor (Marianne Ny) decided that:
i. The Preliminary Investigation in respect of file K246314-10[SW] would be resumed, under the offence of ‘rape’.ii. The preliminary investigation into K246336-10 [AA] would beexpanded to include all the conduct in the complaint.
The complainants appealed and won.
__________________
"Your deepest pools, like your deepest politicians and philosophers, often turn out more shallow than expected." Walter Scott.

Last edited by Wudang; 15th April 2019 at 09:55 AM.
Wudang is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 09:45 AM   #1053
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,081
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
What reason to you have to believe this?
I personally know an Australian citizen that this happened to. He spent 12 months trying to fight the extradition - from jail (bail was not permitted except in "special" circumstances).

An interesting aside is that under the terms of the extradition treaty, the US can't say "hand him over" then decide what charges to lay. They have to name the charges first and the Australian courts in fact ruled that he could not be tried on one of the charges.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 09:59 AM   #1054
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by Wudang View Post
There is nothing "odd" about his prosecution. The case against him has been heard in several UK and Swedish courts and all have found he has a case to answer. Usual caveat: "case to answer" - defence still to be heard.
As I understand it, the second prosecutor seeking rape charges from two women who stated point blank that they were not charging him with anything was the beginning of odd proceedings.

Again, I am only saying I sympathize with his position. Publishing leaked materials involving world powers must make a guy paranoid. What I don't agree with is how many posters are twisting the facts to suit a narrative. The sex crimes in Sweden were debatable, apparently he said/she said, as he denies them. The odds are good that he would have prevailed or got a lower sentence. Instead, he wrecked his health and tossed years of his life away. I believe he was sincere.

eta: your edit: yes, it went from 'scheduling questioning' to 'rape', which I think was also a little odd.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

Last edited by Thermal; 15th April 2019 at 10:02 AM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 10:09 AM   #1055
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,170
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Check the date and start reading the posts. At the time of that TED talk, the Iraq and Afghanistan leaks had barely hit the shelves. He had no reason to worry yet, as he surely knew it would take some time to prove a case.
The whole point of his TED talk is that he studied all the options, and picked Sweden on purpose as the best line of defense against exactly the eventuality he claimed to fear.

Your argument is that he wisely fled Sweden the moment he suspected that eventuality would become manifest. Your argument is further that he wisely went to the UK, a nation far more risky for him than Sweden, if he really feared that eventuality.

And remember, Assange was quite happy to submit to UK custody for questioning, as long as it meant he didn't have to return to Sweden and submit to Swedish custody.

This behavior, combined with his TED talk, makes it pretty clear that his concern in 2010 was not US interest, but rather obviously Swedish interest.

---

On the topic of conspiracy theories in the Swedish prosecutors' office: Both Swedish and UK review upheld the claim that there was a case to answer. So we should probably consider the possibility that the original prosecutor declined to pursue the case, out of an overabundance of concern for protecting Assange and Wikileaks from bad publicity.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 10:20 AM   #1056
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
The whole point of his TED talk is that he studied all the options, and picked Sweden on purpose as the best line of defense against exactly the eventuality he claimed to fear.

Your argument is that he wisely fled Sweden the moment he suspected that eventuality would become manifest. Your argument is further that he wisely went to the UK, a nation far more risky for him than Sweden, if he really feared that eventuality.
No matter how many times you say this, it's still not true. I said repeatedly that he was not fleeing anything for any reason, till he was actually in solitary in the UK. Then, he went into defensive mode. Till then, he was being cooperative. By the time the Statfor email was read by WL (before it was released to the public, of course), he was full-bore opposing any act by anything that would let the US get a hold of him.

Quote:
And remember, Assange was quite happy to submit to UK custody for questioning, as long as it meant he didn't have to return to Sweden and submit to Swedish custody.

This behavior, combined with his TED talk, makes it pretty clear that his concern in 2010 was not US interest, but rather obviously Swedish interest.
See above, repeated for the upmteenth time.

(eta: he no longer had a choice about being in UK custody, so he would logically have to battle the EAW to get back on the road)
(eta 2: he was encouraging the Swedish interrogation off of Swedish soil because he did want to resolve it, IMO. After the interrogation at the embassy, I think Sweden could easily have convicted him in absentia if they thought their case was strong. They did not. The investigation would have been closed, but with a judgement hanging over him in perpetuity, affecting his travel if nothing else. I am frankly a little surprised that they didn't do so.

---

Quote:
On the topic of conspiracy theories in the Swedish prosecutors' office: Both Swedish and UK review upheld the claim that there was a case to answer. So we should probably consider the possibility that the original prosecutor declined to pursue the case, out of an overabundance of concern for protecting Assange and Wikileaks from bad publicity.
Possibly. Also possible that the first prosecutor was telling the truth and that they didn't see a criminal case.

Again, I don't think the Kingdom of Sweden was in cahoots to get Assange. I think Assange truly believed they were.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

Last edited by Thermal; 15th April 2019 at 10:29 AM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 10:26 AM   #1057
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,170
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
No matter how many times you say this, it's still not true. I said repeatedly that he was not fleeing anything for any reason, till he was actually in solitary in the UK. Then, he went into defensive mode. Till then, he was being cooperative. By the time the Statfor email was read by WL (before it was released to the public, of course), he was full-bore opposing any act by anything that would let the US get a hold of him.
I think it's pretty clear from the timing that he was fleeing Sweden.

And if he really was in "full-bore" "defensive mode", why didn't he leap at the chance to return to Sweden, which was his first choice in all the world, as the place to be safe from US persecution?

Assange's claim never made sense, and was never consistent with his actual behavior.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 11:16 AM   #1058
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,099
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Disagreed, I think it is likely to be considerably more complex, especially factoring in the intent of the hacking and its likely results. But neither here nor there. 'Absolutely, positively' is not a call you or I could make.
No it's pretty simple actually. They have to say what criminal acts he's accused of when they make the extradition request. They didn't accuse him of acts that would constitute fraud under Swedish law, rather his alleged criminal acts would fall under the criminal offence of "Data breach".

Quote:
Disagreed again, based on the reading. But you could also argue that Wikileaks did stand to financially gain, being publishers. Again, neither here nor there.
As i said above: If they want to charge him with fraud they have to explicitly make that case in their extradition request. They need to state what criminal acts he's suspected of having done. In the end they didn't accuse him fraud, simply because it would almost certainly not stand up it court.

Edit: Extradition often heavily limits the freedom of prosecutors to charge accused criminals. Usually the receiving state is only allowed to charge them with the specific offences that they are accused of in the extradition request.
__________________
Freedom you all want, you want freedom. Why then do you haggle over a more or less? Freedom can only be the whole of freedom; a piece of freedom is not freedom. You despair of the possibility of obtaining the whole of freedom, freedom from everything - yes, you consider it insanity even to wish this? - Well, then leave off chasing after the phantom, and spend your pains on something better than the - unattainable. - Max Stirner

Last edited by Arcade22; 15th April 2019 at 11:22 AM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 11:35 AM   #1059
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,099
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
As I understand it, the second prosecutor seeking rape charges from two women who stated point blank that they were not charging him with anything was the beginning of odd proceedings.
You don't understand how Swedish legal system operates.

Most criminal offences fall under "public prosecution". With such offences it's not up the victims to "charge" someone with a crime. Hell even if the victims say that they don't want to "file charges", yet still make statements that implicate someone in a crime, it doesn't really make any difference.

All such statements still constitute evidence. Swedish police and prosecutors are legally obligated to investigate any acts seemingly constituting a criminal offence under public prosecution. Formally speaking they are required to prosecute someone even if the victim doesn't want them to be prosecuted and even refuses to assist, although obviously in practice it's often very difficult to convict someone without a cooperative victim.

Edit: Note here that in practice police and prosecutors can't feasibly investigate everything, but when they have concrete allegations about specific individuals it's far more straight forward. Compare this with trying to investigate a stereotypical "ambush" rape where the assailant is completely unknown to the victim and there is very little physical evidence to follow up on.
__________________
Freedom you all want, you want freedom. Why then do you haggle over a more or less? Freedom can only be the whole of freedom; a piece of freedom is not freedom. You despair of the possibility of obtaining the whole of freedom, freedom from everything - yes, you consider it insanity even to wish this? - Well, then leave off chasing after the phantom, and spend your pains on something better than the - unattainable. - Max Stirner

Last edited by Arcade22; 15th April 2019 at 11:48 AM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 11:44 AM   #1060
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,170
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
You don't understand how Swedish legal system operates.

Most criminal offences fall under "public prosecution". With such offences it's not up the victims to "charge" someone with a crime. Hell even if the victims say that they don't want to "file charges", yet still make statements that implicate someone of committed a crime, it doesn't really make any difference.

All such statements still constitute evidence. Swedish police and prosecutors are legally obligated to investigate any acts seemingly constituting a criminal offence under public prosecution. Formally speaking they are required to prosecute someone even if the victim doesn't want them to be prosecuted and even refuses to assist, although obviously in practice it's often very difficult to convict someone without a cooperative victim.
It's the same way in the US.

But I think Thermal is saying it's odd that the second prosecutor said they weren't charging him.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 07:51 PM   #1061
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
It's the same way in the US.

But I think Thermal is saying it's odd that the second prosecutor said they weren't charging him.
Thanks, I worded poorly while doing taxes. My bad
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 01:38 AM   #1062
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,081
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Thanks, I worded poorly while doing taxes. My bad
I will have to remember that excuse next time I am audited.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 04:37 AM   #1063
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,099
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
But I think Thermal is saying it's odd that the second prosecutor said they weren't charging him.
Yet according to the way the Swedish legal system works people aren't charged with a crime until after the criminal investigation is finished and the prosecutor is convinced that they have enough evidence to successfully convict them. While "not being charged" might seem significant to Assange, as if it suggested they were unlikely to prosecute him or even a tactic admission that he was innocent, that is not the case.

If he had competent legal assistance, or even just looked it up online (enough information is available in English on how it works), he should've known this. Yet he and his supporters continued to maintain that him not being charged was somehow an exoneration, or proof that there was something sinister going on.
__________________
Freedom you all want, you want freedom. Why then do you haggle over a more or less? Freedom can only be the whole of freedom; a piece of freedom is not freedom. You despair of the possibility of obtaining the whole of freedom, freedom from everything - yes, you consider it insanity even to wish this? - Well, then leave off chasing after the phantom, and spend your pains on something better than the - unattainable. - Max Stirner

Last edited by Arcade22; 16th April 2019 at 04:38 AM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 05:53 AM   #1064
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
Yet according to the way the Swedish legal system works people aren't charged with a crime until after the criminal investigation is finished and the prosecutor is convinced that they have enough evidence to successfully convict them. While "not being charged" might seem significant to Assange, as if it suggested they were unlikely to prosecute him or even a tactic admission that he was innocent, that is not the case.

If he had competent legal assistance, or even just looked it up online (enough information is available in English on how it works), he should've known this. Yet he and his supporters continued to maintain that him not being charged was somehow an exoneration, or proof that there was something sinister going on.
The odd part is treating the situation so casually, allowing him to leave and saying he was not a wanted man. That was untrue. He was very much a wanted man. Per Wudang's link, he was wanted so badly that the prosecutor was unwilling to wait a week and a half to conduct the interrogation, and that was right after they gave him their blessing to go about his business in the UK.

honestly, now: would you be suspicious if it were you (and you did what Assange does for a living)? He is given permission to travel, and almost immediately, the prosecutor says they cannot wait a week and a half for his return.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 06:41 AM   #1065
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 85,359
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
The odd part is treating the situation so casually, allowing him to leave and saying he was not a wanted man. That was untrue. He was very much a wanted man. Per Wudang's link, he was wanted so badly that the prosecutor was unwilling to wait a week and a half to conduct the interrogation, and that was right after they gave him their blessing to go about his business in the UK.



honestly, now: would you be suspicious if it were you (and you did what Assange does for a living)? He is given permission to travel, and almost immediately, the prosecutor says they cannot wait a week and a half for his return.
When was his travel restricted?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 07:25 AM   #1066
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
When was his travel restricted?
I didn't say it was restricted, so I'm not sure I understand your question. It was certainly restricted when he voluntarily turned himself in to the UK upon hearing of the EAW. Restricted to the point of his passport seized and going into solitary for ten days. Is that the travel restriction you are asking about?

Also, I see Assange has been locked up in what looks like a pretty nasty jail. Is this the normal treatment for bail jumpers and alleged computer hackers? I'm not familiar with Belmarsh but it looks to be a place for violent political criminals.

https://consortiumnews.com/2019/04/1...marish-future/

eta: or do you mean rhetorically that his travel wasn't restricted? Well, that's my point. If Ny wanted him immediately for interrogation and arrest, why allow him to leave as if there was no problem?
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

Last edited by Thermal; 16th April 2019 at 07:27 AM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:01 AM   #1067
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 85,359
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
I didn't say it was restricted, so I'm not sure I understand your question. It was certainly restricted when he voluntarily turned himself in to the UK upon hearing of the EAW. Restricted to the point of his passport seized and going into solitary for ten days. Is that the travel restriction you are asking about?

Also, I see Assange has been locked up in what looks like a pretty nasty jail. Is this the normal treatment for bail jumpers and alleged computer hackers? I'm not familiar with Belmarsh but it looks to be a place for violent political criminals.

https://consortiumnews.com/2019/04/1...marish-future/

eta: or do you mean rhetorically that his travel wasn't restricted? Well, that's my point. If Ny wanted him immediately for interrogation and arrest, why allow him to leave as if there was no problem?
Because until the paperwork was done etc. he would have been free to leave the country, Sweden has strong human rights legislation which mean you can't restrict someone's travel because you might in a day or two be ready to arrest/charge etc. You either have the required paperwork done or you don't.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:05 AM   #1068
Wudang
BOFH
 
Wudang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: People's Republic of South Yorkshire
Posts: 11,556
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
If Ny wanted him immediately for interrogation and arrest, why allow him to leave as if there was no problem?
Possibly the events of the 27th and the behaviour of JA's lawyer made her doubtful of their willingness to adhere to the process? To my mind his lawyer did not help JA's case.
__________________
"Your deepest pools, like your deepest politicians and philosophers, often turn out more shallow than expected." Walter Scott.
Wudang is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:13 AM   #1069
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 42,232
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post

Also, I see Assange has been locked up in what looks like a pretty nasty jail. Is this the normal treatment for bail jumpers and alleged computer hackers? I'm not familiar with Belmarsh but it looks to be a place for violent political criminals.

https://consortiumnews.com/2019/04/1...marish-future/
It's also a local prison, as well as dealing with Category A prisoners. Assange appeared in Westminster Magistrates court, and will be sentenced at Southwark Crown Court; I don't know if Belmarsh is a usual prison for those courts.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Ezekiel 23:20
zooterkin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:14 AM   #1070
Wudang
BOFH
 
Wudang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: People's Republic of South Yorkshire
Posts: 11,556
And prisons are another victim of the years of Tory austerity and overcrowded. Maybe it was whichever had room?
__________________
"Your deepest pools, like your deepest politicians and philosophers, often turn out more shallow than expected." Walter Scott.
Wudang is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:15 AM   #1071
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,170
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
If Ny wanted him immediately for interrogation and arrest, why allow him to leave as if there was no problem?
Because Swedish law doesn't permit prosecutors to restrict travel prior to justifying such a restriction. In the interval between Ny seeing the need and Ny producing the justification, Assange skipped town. You previously asked why Assange would wait around in Sweden for the US to complete a hypothetical indictment. The same exact principle applies here.

Last edited by theprestige; 16th April 2019 at 09:16 AM.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2019, 12:53 AM   #1072
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,003
In the UK (I do not know about Sweden) it is not unusual to have an appointment to be arrested even for a fairly serious crime. A suspect will be asked to attend a police station with his lawyer, they will then be arrested and cautioned and questioned. They then may be released on police bail (agreed terms of bail which would then include travel restrictions).

If you failed to attend the appointment then the police will try to pick you up and you are likely to end up in jail and have to apply to a court for bail.

There is a difference between not being allowed to travel, and failing to attend your appointment with the prosecuting authorities.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2019, 05:45 AM   #1073
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by Wudang View Post
Possibly the events of the 27th and the behaviour of JA's lawyer made her doubtful of their willingness to adhere to the process? To my mind his lawyer did not help JA's case.
I think Assange left for the UK on or before the 27th, but tbh I'm not sure.

Agreed on his Swedish attorney huritng more than helping, as your earlier link makes it plain he was either deceptive or wildly careless. I hadn't realized how much backpedaling was done on the published narrative when they hit the court.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2019, 05:58 AM   #1074
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Because until the paperwork was done etc. he would have been free to leave the country, Sweden has strong human rights legislation which mean you can't restrict someone's travel because you might in a day or two be ready to arrest/charge etc. You either have the required paperwork done or you don't.
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Because Swedish law doesn't permit prosecutors to restrict travel prior to justifying such a restriction. In the interval between Ny seeing the need and Ny producing the justification, Assange skipped town. You previously asked why Assange would wait around in Sweden for the US to complete a hypothetical indictment. The same exact principle applies here.
That's true, you can't restrict travel till you have the formal legal authority. I guess I'm wondering why the interrogation hadn't been scheduled a month after the interview, if they were so confident a rapist was on the loose in Sweden. Seems odd to delay so long. Seems an unreasonably slow moving process.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2019, 06:00 AM   #1075
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by zooterkin View Post
It's also a local prison, as well as dealing with Category A prisoners. Assange appeared in Westminster Magistrates court, and will be sentenced at Southwark Crown Court; I don't know if Belmarsh is a usual prison for those courts.
Originally Posted by Wudang View Post
And prisons are another victim of the years of Tory austerity and overcrowded. Maybe it was whichever had room?
Thanks for that, the prison's website does say openly that it holds prisoners for a wide variety of offenses.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2019, 06:01 AM   #1076
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,099
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
The odd part is treating the situation so casually, allowing him to leave and saying he was not a wanted man. That was untrue. He was very much a wanted man.
Well obvious he wasn't "wanted" at the time. In general, to give someone a "travel ban" there has to be concert evidence that connects a suspect to the alleged crime. It's quite likely there wasn't enough evidence available at the time to legally prohibit him from leaving the country.

Legally speaking he only became "wanted" according to Swedish law when the prosecutor decided he was to be detained in his absence, which is more or less the Swedish equivalent to an arrest warrant.

Quote:
honestly, now: would you be suspicious if it were you (and you did what Assange does for a living)? He is given permission to travel, and almost immediately, the prosecutor says they cannot wait a week and a half for his return.
As I've stated before, the way pretrial detention works is overly rigid and inflexible, although more often people are detained too easily and for too long. The only real thing that makes this specific case exceptional is that he left the country.

Deciding to fight the extradition request is the point where he showed he wasn't willing to risk a trial. This wasn't just a spur of the moment decision made in "panic" as you seem to suggest. He consistently appealed the decision as far as he could for months and he hid inside the Embassy only after his legal options ran out. You don't "panic" for months while hanging out with your groupies that treat you as a hero, seriously.
__________________
Freedom you all want, you want freedom. Why then do you haggle over a more or less? Freedom can only be the whole of freedom; a piece of freedom is not freedom. You despair of the possibility of obtaining the whole of freedom, freedom from everything - yes, you consider it insanity even to wish this? - Well, then leave off chasing after the phantom, and spend your pains on something better than the - unattainable. - Max Stirner
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2019, 06:07 AM   #1077
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
In the UK (I do not know about Sweden) it is not unusual to have an appointment to be arrested even for a fairly serious crime. A suspect will be asked to attend a police station with his lawyer, they will then be arrested and cautioned and questioned. They then may be released on police bail (agreed terms of bail which would then include travel restrictions).

If you failed to attend the appointment then the police will try to pick you up and you are likely to end up in jail and have to apply to a court for bail.

There is a difference between not being allowed to travel, and failing to attend your appointment with the prosecuting authorities.
This is what happened with the EAW, when Assange turned himself in by appointment. Seems a civil way to handle it; in the States, you are arrested quickly and without warning and questioning begins till you request a lawyer.

I had a buddy who once got in a shouting match with a sleazy guy, and he made some kind of hyperbolic threat to tear him apart or something. Police were at his house the same night, putting him in cuffs and charging him with terroristic threats. The police knew my buddy and actually came to his house at midnight so as not to publicly embarrass him in front of his neighbors (they knew the accuser, too). I suppose the speed of American treatment of suspected violent criminals raises an instinctive suspicion of a system that is so meandering about it.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

Last edited by Thermal; 17th April 2019 at 06:25 AM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2019, 06:22 AM   #1078
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
Well obvious he wasn't "wanted" at the time. In general, to give someone a "travel ban" there has to be concert evidence that connects a suspect to the alleged crime. It's quite likely there wasn't enough evidence available at the time to legally prohibit him from leaving the country.
Yes, but as I said earlier, I would expect that to be communicated in good faith. something along the lines of 'you are free to go, but we may haul you back under warrant and plan to do so in short order.'

Or even easier, just get things moving in under a month? How long are suspected rapists encouraged to prowl the streets? What new information were they waiting for?

Quote:
Legally speaking he only became "wanted" according to Swedish law when the prosecutor decided he was to be detained in his absence, which is more or less the Swedish equivalent to an arrest warrant.



As I've stated before, the way pretrial detention works is overly rigid and inflexible, although more often people are detained too easily and for too long. The only real thing that makes this specific case exceptional is that he left the country.
After a month of hanging around Sweden after the interview? Not exactly a hasty getaway.

Quote:
Deciding to fight the extradition request is the point where he showed he wasn't willing to risk a trial. This wasn't just a spur of the moment decision made in "panic" as you seem to suggest. He consistently appealed the decision as far as he could for months and he hid inside the Embassy only after his legal options ran out. You don't "panic" for months while hanging out with your groupies that treat you as a hero, seriously.
The extradition fight began while he was in solitary, which remember, the UN has condemned as willfully violating his human rights. I see him as fully cooperating till then, although it is not clear whether his Swedish attorney relayed information to him. Per Wudang's link, he was inconsistent at best.

So Assange was slumming in Sweden for a month while he knew he was being investigated. Ok. In an abundance of cooperation, he specifically got permission to leave the country, which was granted. Ok. He turned himself in voluntarily in the UK. Ok. He challenged the EAW on different grounds (all failed). Ok. Is that the suspicious part? Should an accused just belly up? I don't see what he did that was so outlandish.

eta: forgot stuff
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

Last edited by Thermal; 17th April 2019 at 06:37 AM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2019, 06:46 AM   #1079
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,099
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Is that the suspicious part? Should an accused just belly up? I don't see what he did that was so outlandish.
All the while he was claiming that the allegations were part of a sinister conspiracy by the US to have him executed only because he published the truth about what they had done. This is how he acted in private:

Quote:
In one astonishing scene, Assange talks to Helena Kennedy QC, who is advising him on how to deal with the allegations. Assange says, as if to excuse himself, that it is a “radical feminist conspiracy” and dismisses the complainants as lesbians. Kennedy tells him it is not helpful to talk like this. “No, not publicly,” he says, while being filmed. Her look of despair is priceless. Assange then explains why it is not in the best interests of the women to press charges. “An actual court case is going to be very hard for these women … they will be reviled for ever by a large segment of the world population. I don’t think it’s in their interest to proceed that way.’’
https://www.theguardian.com/film/201...julian-assange

His actions and statements, especially the way he acted in private, gives the impression that his resistance to being extradited to Sweden was done almost entirely in bad faith.
__________________
Freedom you all want, you want freedom. Why then do you haggle over a more or less? Freedom can only be the whole of freedom; a piece of freedom is not freedom. You despair of the possibility of obtaining the whole of freedom, freedom from everything - yes, you consider it insanity even to wish this? - Well, then leave off chasing after the phantom, and spend your pains on something better than the - unattainable. - Max Stirner
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2019, 07:35 AM   #1080
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,059
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
All the while he was claiming that the allegations were part of a sinister conspiracy by the US to have him executed only because he published the truth about what they had done. This is how he acted in private:



https://www.theguardian.com/film/201...julian-assange

His actions and statements, especially the way he acted in private, gives the impression that his resistance to being extradited to Sweden was done almost entirely in bad faith.
I'm not sure one douchy comment is enough to condemn his entire legal and political strategy on.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:26 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.