News

[The Reefuge]

There is no way you can categorically state that fact. Only a court of law can decide whether that is the case, as per the law.

I have no issues with Assange per se (even though I think he is a bit of an ass), or Wikileaks. I am all for freedom of speech and spreading the truth.

Hi chimaera,

You are correct, there is no way I can absolutely state that as I was not there. However, given the nature of the problem, and the information at hand, I can say there is a 99.99999999999% chance that it simply did not happen. The only purpose these rape charges serve is to provide a platform for the US government to extradite him to the US to charge him with other laws broken. The only purpose that serves is to shut him up. In fact, here is a quote from an email from the vice president of Stratfort.

“Move him from country to country to face various charges for the next 25 years…. Bankrupt the arsehole first, ruin his life. Give him 7-12 yrs for conspiracy.”

The only reason for this is because he provides a platform for people to know the truth. This is how people who want to know the truth are treated in todays world. If something happens to Assange, the only hope left would be a revolution. If people sit and watch while an innocent man dies in the name of freedom, there will be no hope left for humanity, and we will deserve everything that comes our way from that point on.

The way I see it, at the moment we a blind sheep who have learned nothing from the past. We simply say yes to anything we are told to do and live our lives the way we do due to the misery of others. There must, and will come a point where we will band together and put a stop to this. There will come a day when people love, and I mean truely love one another to the point where our brothers and sisters will be equals. When this day comes, the generations after it will not know of lies, wars, money or religion. They will only know peace. People like Assange want this to happen. The rich and powerful want nothing but power and control.

Thanks.

 

[MichelleShocked]

There is no way you can categorically state that fact. Only a court of law can decide whether that is the case, as per the law..

Actually, a court of law cannot decide if it happened. It can only decide if it believes it happened. Body fluid swabs and DNA profiling will determine, after a rape, if it occurred and the person most likely to have committed the crime. Notice I said "person most likely" - DNA does not determine who did, it determines who did not. Same with paternity testing - DNA can rule people out but cannot prove who did. The one who matches the profile the closest is the culprit. Unless another person is tested who has a closer match.
I would be interested to know if the victims, as per post rape protocol, were swabbed and checked for hair/skin samples (that is why if you are ever raped, you do not shower, despite the understandable and overwhelming need to "get clean" - you get to the police asap).
If no DNA samples were taken, one has to wonder why and if the charges are valid.

 

[DavidS]

The way I see it, at the moment we a blind sheep who have learned nothing from the past. We simply say yes to anything we are told to do and live our lives the way we do due to the misery of others.

Couldn't have said that better myself.
Our society does its best to insulate itself from the things it doesn't want to deal with. We have schools that ban physical contact, parents are now too scared to let their kids walk to school or climb trees, a smack on the arse to an obnoxious brat of a child is considered abuse. We focus on petty little things. We bitch about expensive electricity while we refuse to allow nuclear reactors to be built providing cheaper, cleaner energy than we have now. We bitch about phone coverage but we don't want mobile towers. We live in a society that is so pre-occupied with pathetic little things that we totally ignore the real issues going on around us. We demand things, yet we don't want to compromise. We jump up and down about things that we don't actually understand. We apply FUD and vapour when we need to apply knowledge and understanding.

When people learn to think for themselves without the constraints of what we've been told is good and what is bad, it is only at that point where we can start to see things a little more clearly.
Governments do not live in fear of us. That is something that needs to change.

 

[MichelleShocked]

Unless you are engaging in criminal activity, why would you worry about them 'using the data against you'?

That is true.
To a point.
But if I am not engaging in criminal activity and am in no way a suspect in a crime, why does my govt want to know what I'm up to?
Its not about whether I (and I use "I" in the personal sense as opposed to "he" or "they") am a criminal or making plans to be one.
Its about the assumption the govt makes in choosing to use that technology to check on me.
If I tell a police officer that such and such is going to kill someone tomorrow and give him a place and time, he is going to say "well, we have to wait til it happens" (unless he has good reason to believe me)
If I tell my lawyer that my ex-husband plans to breach court orders, he says "well, we have to wait til he's done it"
I can't have someone charged because they planned to rape me.
In all other cases of law, the criminal event must happen, THEN investigation.
But for my govt to want to monitor me, even at random intervals, the assumption is that i may be planning a criminal activity. And they are pre-investigating.
This offends my sense of decency. I choose to act like an honorable person because I wish to and I have a whole set of personal beliefs that back up my choice. Its not because I am intimidated by men in beige suits (Billy Connolly reference there) who are going to know what I am doing
Its just that it offends me mightily that some little man or woman in an office can decide to check up on what i am doing and when simply because I might be doing something illegal. Or planning to.
What happened to presumption of innocence?