Comment Re:Poor Scalia (Score 1) 1083
It's easy to guess who the villains will be in fiction written by Leftists. Of course it gets more than a little pathetic when the "villainy" is fabricated.
It's easy to guess who the villains will be in fiction written by Leftists. Of course it gets more than a little pathetic when the "villainy" is fabricated.
Pot, meet kettle.
I understand your confusion since truth generally has no meaning for you. For the rest of us that there is a difference. Not counting slaves as whole people for the purposes of political representation reduced the South's representation in the House which was definitely a disadvantage. It would also reduce their say in the election of the President since the Electoral College is based on Congressional representation. That is also a disadvantage, especially with the rise of the abolitionist party known as the Republicans.
But the side effect was that the concept of slavery was BUILT INTO the Constitution.
I think it is better to state that the Constitution was written such that it both acknowledges the existence of slavery while disadvantaging it.
Quoting from your link:
To see how extremist these programs are, just consider the tactics they boast of using to achieve those ends: “false flag operations” (posting material to the internet and falsely attributing it to someone else), fake victim blog posts (pretending to be a victim of the individual whose reputation they want to destroy), and posting “negative information” on various forums.
Where do you think that is going on?
Courts in the UK looked at many questions, including would the allegation against Assange constitute rape in the UK, and did the prosecutor have the authority to issue the EAW. Here are extracts from the magistrate's ruling:
City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court
(Sitting at Belmarsh Magistrates’ Court)
The judicial authority in Sweden -v- Julian Paul Assange
I make the following findings of fact from the evidence I have heard:
2. In Sweden, a person interrogated for rape is normally detained and held incommunicado during the process. These decisions are taken by a court.
....I heard live evidence from a recently retired Swedish prosecutor. Mr Alhem told me in there is nothing wrong with the EAW in this case. Similarly Brita Sundberg-Weitman said that Ms Ny is entitled to issue an EAW, although not on the facts as she understood them to be. Mr Hurtig is a Swedish lawyer. He may not be an expert on extradition but nevertheless he must have been well placed to discover whether Ms Ny had the appropriate authority, and he has not suggested otherwise. Ms Ny herself has made a statement saying she has the appropriate authority.
Assange: would the rape allegation also be rape under English law?
The Magistrates’ Court ruled (emphasis added):
The position with offence 4 is different. This is an allegation of rape. The framework list is ticked for rape. The defence accepts that normally the ticking of a framework list offence box on an EAW would require very little analysis by the court. However they then developed a sophisticated argument that the conduct alleged here would not amount to rape in most European countries. However, what is alleged here is that Mr Assange “deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state”. In this country that would amount to rape.
----------
No, this doesn't work for you since you want him to be guilty before he's even moved.
No, I don't. I just think the question should be answered in court if the allegations are strong enough to support a trial.
If you are thoughtful, you may see some irony in this:
Sweden Angered By Julian Assange Fight, Says It Won't Extradite Him If He Faces Death Penalty
The rape allegation is the most serious and if proven in court could lead to up to four years in jail.
The lawyer for the two women stood by the allegations and criticised Assange for not coming back to be questioned.
"It's an abuse of the asylum instrument, the purpose of which is to protect people from persecution and torture
"He doesn't risk being handed over to the United States for torture or death penalty. He should be brought to justice in Sweden. This is completely absurd."
At the same time, Assange might not have that much to worry about, said law professor Christian Diesen. He noted that in practice nine out of 10 cases of alleged rape are dropped by prosecutors before coming to court.
"But where there are no witnesses, no pictures and no technical evidence, only the accusation of the woman against the man and he says that sex was consensual, then normally the situation is that the word of the woman will not be enough for a conviction," Diesen told said.
Assange is likely to stay in that embassy for much longer than the possible prison time he faces in Sweden, and he will now always have this cloud over him long into the future since he does not deal with it. Why do you suppose that is?
So you don't contest that there were three prosecutors, two of which thought that the charges should be investigated, and now the attempt is actually being made? That's a start.
Many people will jettison logic and equality before the law to defend Assange.
Sweden has a long history of independence with regard to the US and the Soviet Union (and now Russia). Calling Sweden a "lapdog" of the United States is ludicrous. Sweden declined US requests to extradite deserters during and after Vietnam, for example. Almost 1,000 Americans fled there after desertion.
The few (what was it, 2?) that Sweden surrendered to the US for rendition we believed to be involved in terrorism, they were not known to be innocent. (A lie of yours?) Sweden is not inclined to support further renditions, and Assange isn't believed to be involved with terrorism. Or are you prepared to make a revelation about previously unknown links between Assange and ISIS or al Qaeda?
Assange is wanted in Sweden for crimes committed in Sweden. Suggestions that it would be easier to extradite him from Sweden where both the UK and Sweden would have to agree instead of just extraditing him from the UK where only the UK has to agree are sheer fantasy and a flimsy excuse for Assange not facing justice. It is as simple as that.
Sweden Angered By Julian Assange Fight, Says It Won't Extradite Him If He Faces Death Penalty
I think it could also be highly useful when disasters strike, like a tornado or hurricane taking out a town.
Although I may have gotten a detail wrong, you've got an even bigger one wrong. Go back and read your link. There aren't two prosecutors involved here, there are at least three. (Hmm, do you think all three prosecutors were women?) Two of those three prosecutors wanted to change Assange. Doesn't that seem to indicate that isn't an unreasonable position? Speaking of bias, why do you think that third prosecutor wanted to drop changes that the other two wanted to pursue? "Who got to her" should be your question.
I doubt that most Windows users will ever hear of it. The vulnerability will probably be around for years to come providing years of entertainment for security professionals and identity theft resolution departments.
They must want to arrest him since there is an arrest warrant out for him. How can they arrest him if they can't take control of him? That is nonsense. Questioning following arrest is typical, not unusual. Assange had a chance for questioning without arrest, but that is gone now. If Assange is surrendered for arrest he will probably be in custody until this is cleared up, which probably means a trial and maybe prison. Now he is a bail jumper and nobody will take a chance on him doing it again. And once Sweden is done with him he will have to face UK justice for violating his bail and becoming a fugitive. Assange will probably send several more years in that embassy to try to run out the rest of the charges against him instead of face them.
So in your view my advocating that Julian Assange be treated like anyone else and that he face the allegations of sexual assault against him is "foaming at the mouth"? If that is the case you are probably coming from a fringe perspective, and I would like to know why you think that Assange shouldn't face his accusers like anyone else in a Western nation (including Japan)?
I'm also happy to bring some facts to the discussion that are often overlooked, or denied. Up thread here AmiMoJo is engaging in distortion, painting a false picture for political reasons. He backs Assange just like he has soft pedaled North Korea's record, that of one of the most brutal dictatorships on earth that has starved hundreds of thousands or millions to maintain its huge army and build nuclear weapons, saying in essence that they aren't so bad. I see you ridiculing religion, and asking people for evidence of their faith. Is it too much to ask that we stick to the facts and accurately discuss them on other topics? Or is Assange a secular demi-god beyond questioning and the standards of mortal men? Where is your skepticism here?
I expect the reason that many of my submissions are accepted is because I try to submit interesting stories that would appeal to the Slashdot community. If you don't like what I submit, why don't you submit more?
Obviously at this point it isn't a bug, its a "feature." The only question is why did Google decide to push this negative feature?
To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk. -- Thomas Edison
