Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:23AM   Printer-friendly
from the times-they-are-a'changing dept.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is finally being questioned by prosecutors more than six years after he was first accused of rape in Sweden.

Ingrid Isgren, Sweden's deputy chief prosecutor, arrived at the Ecuadorian Embassy this morning, according to The Guardian, ending a stalemate which began in 2012 when the South American nation offered Assange political asylum on the grounds that he faced political persecution from the United States.

Assange claims that the rape accusations, which he denies, are part of a plot to extradite him to the United States that would swing into action were he to answer prosecutors' questions in the Scandinavian country.

The interview suggests some forward movement is being made in the diplomatic deadlock between Ecuador and Sweden regarding the arrangements for Swedish prosecutors to talk to Assange in the embassy.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @02:25PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @02:25PM (#426960)

    So in your hierarchy of trust a random blogger with a history of made-up stories telling an uncorroborated story - despite claiming there were witnesses - without naming a single source is good enough because why?

    Are you so completely adrift that anyone who tells you what you want to hear is a somebody you will believe? Aren't you one to say that women who claim to be raped shouldn't automatically be believed because she might just be using it to hurt a man she has a grudge against? What's the difference here?

  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:20PM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:20PM (#426984) Journal

    http://www.redstate.com/sweetie15/2016/10/03/hillary-clinton-suggest-drone-strike-stop-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange/ [redstate.com]

    I like this page too, http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/hillary-clinton-julian-assange-229123 [politico.com] "I don't recall any joke" because it was no joke.

    http://observer.com/2016/06/why-julian-assange-doesnt-want-hillary-clinton-to-be-president/ [observer.com]
    “I have had years of experience in dealing with Hillary Clinton and have read thousands of her cables. Hillary lacks judgement and will push the United States into endless, stupid wars which spread terrorism. Her personality combined with her poor policy decisions have directly contributed to the rise of ISIS,” Assange wrote on WikiLeaks in February 2016. “She’s a war hawk with bad judgement who gets an unseemly emotional rush out of killing people,” he added, in reference to a video of Clinton celebrating the overthrow of Libya’s leader, Muammar Gaddafi. In an interview with CBS News, Clinton laughed, “We came, we saw, he died.”

    http://www.usasupreme.com/hillary-clinton-joe-biden-called-assassination-julian-assange/ [usasupreme.com]
    Vice President Joe Biden, coining a phrase later echoed by Mitch McConnell, labels Assange a “high-tech terrorist.” Karl Rove described the WikiLeaks editor-in-chief as an “enemy combatant” who should be “hunted down.”

    Democrat strategist and CNN commentator Bob Beckel went further, publicly calling for an illegal assassination. Stating that he is against the death penalty, Beckel suggested that in the case of “treasonous, traitor” Assange we should forget due process and “just shoot the son of a bitch.“

    “A dead man can’t leak stuff,” he said.

    As for Snopes -

    http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/17/fact-checking-snopes-websites-political-fact-checker-is-just-a-failed-liberal-blogger/ [dailycaller.com]
    http://www.angrypatriotmovement.com/who-is-behind-snopes/ [angrypatriotmovement.com]
    https://ethicsalarms.com/2016/07/31/bye-bye-snopes-youre-dead-to-me-now/ [ethicsalarms.com]
    http://mynewsla.com/hollywood/2016/06/20/snopes-vs-daily-caller-fact-checker-hit-as-hillary-backer/ [mynewsla.com]

    It's really not a bad idea to fact check the fact checkers.

    Of course, there are still people who don't believe that the US MSM are controlled by progressives and/or libers. You just can't convince anyone of something they have already decided against.

    • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:40PM

      by tangomargarine (667) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:40PM (#427000)

      If they haven't already, Snopes should publish an April Fools article about how Snopes finds Snopes debunked.

      --
      "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @10:30PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @10:30PM (#427244)

      Of course, there are still people who don't believe that the US MSM are controlled by progressives and/or libers.

      Oh stop with that shit already. It isn't a liberal/conservative debate, its a class debate. The rich own the media and use it to spin things however they'd like. You do have good points pretty often but please drop the partisan bullshit. The media isn't liberal, it is manipulated for specific purposes. Any true liberal / progressive wouldn't even be allowed in the studios!