Julian Assange: rapist or not?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Zeuzzz said:
The prime minister of Ecuador is awesome. Really great leader. Fox news would not last a second there.

Can that be a bad thing?

Julian Assange Interviews Rafael Correa on 'The World Tomorrow'
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=248198
Click to expand...

The President of Ecuador DOES indeed have a well deserved reputation for stifling free expression and muzzling the press, which is one of the many reasons that Julian is considered an international joke (another being that he is basically collecting a paycheck from the Kremlin propaganda department)

Anyway, I want to thank you for that post, it was perfect.
 
Joey McGee said:
I wonder how many of the several mothers of the many children he has fathered feel about his stated goals to impregnate women all over the world
Click to expand...

Just curious, do you have any evidence to support that allegation? A video that shows him saying it, audio of him saying it, or from something that he wrote himself? I'm aware that people have made the claim that they heard him say it, but I have yet to actually see any proof of it.

I'm not saying that it isn't possible that he did actually say it, but it is an allegation that could affect this court case. If the allegation was being used to show a motivation for why he would forcibly rip his condom during intercourse with the victim or force unprotected sex with the half sleeping victim, then if there is no actual evidence to support it, it can only assumed to be hearsay.
 
Last edited:
Silhouette said:
Just curious, do you have any evidence to support that allegation? A video that shows him saying it, audio of him saying it, or from something that he wrote himself? I'm aware that people have made the claim that they heard him say it, but I have yet to actually see any proof of it.

I'm not saying that it isn't possible that he did actually say it, but it is an allegation that could affect this court case. If the allegation was being used to show a motivation for why he would forcibly rip his condom during intercourse with the victim or force unprotected sex with the half sleeping victim, then if there is no actual evidence to support it, it can only assumed to be hearsay.
Click to expand...

Yes, I believe this is in evidence; http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-I-want-make-pregnant--I-prefer-virgins.html
 
trustbutverify said:
I'm not sure taking financial responsibility is part of the Assange master plan for superior seed distribution.
Click to expand...
Yeah, he relies on donations. ;) For his business, and his personal life. Hey think of the prestige they are getting being a part of him! It's a great deal.
 
Last edited:
Silhouette said:
Just curious, do you have any evidence to support that allegation? A video that shows him saying it, audio of him saying it, or from something that he wrote himself?
Click to expand...
Come off it! Seriously! Yes not just entered as evidence in the High-Court of London, but from his former spokesman at wikileaks, Berg! WTF did the CIA pay off that guy? When that many people put their privacy on the line by naming themselves as witnesses, you gotta wonder how many other people could say a similar story but are staying out of it because enough people have complained. Yeah I don't have a *********** videotape, get real. What's your explanation for the statements of all of these people, huh? Is it another "bog standard tactic of the pentagon?" What babble.
 
Last edited:
16.5 said:
he is basically collecting a paycheck from the Kremlin propaganda department
Click to expand...
Yeah one of the only places he could ever find support for a reason. Even those ******** are probably regretting propping him up.

I have not met a pro-Assange person who I haven't shocked out of support with the details of his rape allegations, specifically works when they find out about blaming the Pentagon for the claims.
 
Last edited:
PhantomWolf said:
That the Government can and will shut down and gag a media outlet because they didn't like what that outlet was reporting or its opinions?

Seriously, do you even think about these things before asking?
Click to expand...


Give an example of this happening please? Thanks.

I think you are confusing toxic media coverage from foreign influences being held to account for what they say with censoring the press.
 
Zeuzzz said:
That's Venezuela, not Ecuador. Chavez is one of the most successful democratic leaders in the world, he is certainly one of the most consistently elected even with the media usually being very anti him.
Click to expand...
Chavez is a mixed bag. He is popular with the indigenous peoples but he's also not great on freedom of the press and it's unlikely the elections have been fair.

OTOH, the corporate influence in Latin America has just as bad a reputation. I don't think the right wing dictators (elected or not) and military governments have been much better.

I believe, like in Cuba, the population is divided depending on who you are better off living under.

Reporters without borders doesn't give Ecuador or Venezuela very high marks.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Chavez is a mixed bag. He is popular with the indigenous peoples but he's also not great on freedom of the press and it's unlikely the elections have been fair.
Click to expand...


I should say that George Galloway sums up the Chavez situation extremely well in this oxford union address. It seems that holding the press to account for unfair news is actually a rather good indicator of a successful and fair election, like Chavez is known for. And even with the corporate media always being on the side of his opponent and for the rich population he has a remarkable record.

George Galloway on Gay Rights and Hugo Chavez | Oxford Union


(yes, I posted a Galloway video, please don't whine about him in this thread, take it to the appropriate one if you want to do that)
 
Zeuzzz said:
I should say that George Galloway sums up the Chavez situation extremely well in this oxford union address. It seems that holding the press to account for unfair news is actually a rather good indicator of a successful and fair election, like Chavez is known for. And even with the corporate media always being on the side of his opponent and for the rich population he has a remarkable record.
Click to expand...

And this is exactly the problem. Who decides what is "unfair news"? Who gets to say what opinion is allowed and what is unacceptable? Who gets to determine what critism is valid and which is not?

The way to deal with "unfair news" is by countering it with "fair news" not by gagging it. Freedom of the media, and freedom of speech means the allowing of ALL speech and media, even the ones you don't like or who might say nasty things about you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom