The BBC has been blowing its own trumpet today with its ‘scoop’ about Assange, yet another of the BBC’s heroes along with the traitor and spy, Edward Snowden, and the self-admitted terror trained Moazzam Begg.
It’s been telling us all day about the ‘arbitrary detention’ of Assange….and yet he hasn’t been detained, he has voluntarily chosen to remain in the Ecuadorian embassy as he hides from the due process of law in regard to an accusation of rape. The BBC tells us that…‘Assange’s supporter and friend Vaughan Smith hopes he will now be freed’.
‘Freed‘? He’s not incarcerated…he’s in hiding…from the Law.
Whilst the BBC article gives the vast bulk of its space to Assange and his supporters it grudgingly admits the government thinks the UN panel is wrong….
“We have been consistently clear that Mr Assange has never been arbitrarily detained by the UK but is, in fact, voluntarily avoiding lawful arrest by choosing to remain in the Ecuadorean embassy,” he added.
No sign from the BBC’s own analysis that Assange’s case at the UN is so much bunk and completely without any sound basis in reality.
The BBC also misleadingly says this…’Swedish prosecutors dropped two sex assault claims against Mr Assange last year. However, he still faces the more serious accusation of rape.’
That makes it sound as if there was no case to answer on those two sexual assault charges….but that’s not true…and again in the report the BBC link to that fact is once again underplayed telling us that…
Earlier, Swedish prosecutors dropped two sex assault claims against Mr Assange, who had denied the claims.
Mr Assange still faces the more serious accusation of rape, which he also denies.
Only way down the page do we find that this is the reality of why those cases were dropped…
-
August 2015 – Swedish prosecutors drop their investigation into two allegations – one of sexual molestation and one of unlawful coercion because they have run out of time to question him.
They dropped the case because the statute of limitations on the lesser charges has run out…it’s a legal technicality not proof of his innocence.
The Telegraph reminds us of what the BBC prefers you don’t know…
Assange chose to knock on the door of the Ecuadorian embassy of his own free will, begging to be allowed inside because he’d lost his case to avoid extradition to Sweden. It wasn’t just that he’d lost, either; he lost spectacularly at every English court he went to, including the Supreme Court. That’s the highest court in the land, and not known for being a patsy of the ‘dark forces’ supposedly conspiring to destroy the Australian campaigner for truth, transparency and international justice.
If Assange really is a campaigner for all those things, he needs to explain why the basic legal processes that apply to the rest of us should be waived for him.
Always the same with the BBC…if you’re a Muslim, an immigrant or one of the Left’s iconic figures you can get away with anything from terrorism to mass murder and rape.
I saw this extraordinary interview on Sky News this afternoon. Kay Burley is shouted down by Assange’s friend Henry Vaughan Lockhart Smith, and what a dreadful man he is. “Julian Assange is the victim in this case……He’s a dissident…….He deserves compensation…….If we can’t respect the UN then what’s it for.”
Oh, I’m sorry. There was I thinking that there may be another victim who is alleging Assange raped her. But never mind, being a “truth-teller” and “dissident” excuses poor sexual etiquette. A woman’s right not to suffer sexual violence and rape appears to be slipping lower and lower down the bien-pensants’ sliding-scale of relativism. And where are the feminists now when you need them?
Kay Burley tries to put across the central issue. Assange is wanted by the Swedish police to answer rape allegations, but to little avail.
http://news.sky.com/story/1636046/assange-arbitrarily-detained-in-embassy
There is an insightful interview by Glenn Reynolds of Amy Alkon here:
http://www.pjtv.com/series/instavision-with-glenn-reynolds-86/campus-rape-are-the-accused-being-treated-unfairly-11733/
I think she gives a pretty good explanation of how feminists ignore rape, when it suits them to. She thinks that today’s feminists, who turn a blind eye to Cologne and even to the continuing horrors in Iraq and Nigeria, have a hierarchy of victimhood, in which white women don’t really matter. Assange’s alleged victims were white Swedes. Guess what: thugs can rape and even murder women and feminists will turn a blind eye. When it comes to rape, we’ve already seen that the ideology absolves the sin, in the eyes of the left.
On the whole I would say that Edward Snowden has been a good thing for UKIP, and the indigenous British people. Do not forget that we have a bunch of careerist running our Nation, as a public relations job for traitors from Eton. We know that Cameron has used the traitorous contortions of reason, with the statement “not in the British National Interest to leave the EU” as an excuse for the surveillance of, and the infiltration of, UKIP by the Intelligence Agencies, thanks to leaks from patriots within these agencies.
But UKIP has said “As a Libertarian party UKIP is totally opposed to mass surveillance. In order to protect the security of the British people, surveillance must only be carried out on a specific person or group after there is sound evidence or reason to believe terrorism is being planned, and the go ahead is authorised by a judge. UKIP also wants to stop our endless, foreign wars, and is opposed to Cameron’s policy of using British agents in stoking up trouble in the Ukraine, for the benefit of the EU.
UKIPs manifesto suggests unifying British intelligence agencies, including MI5, MI6, GCHQ and BBC Monitoring. UKIP will create a new over-arching role of Director of National Intelligence who will be charged with reviewing UK intelligence and security, in order to ensure threats are identified, monitored and dealt with by the swiftest, most appropriate and legal means available. He or she will be responsible for bringing all intelligence services together; developing cyber security measures; cutting down on waste and encouraging information and resource sharing.
But at the moment, I would say that David Cameron is a more dangerous enemy for Britain, than Julian Assange.
The last high-profile UN-related story here in the UK (that I remember) was that of the United Nations ‘housing envoy’ Raquel Rolnik who criticised the ‘Bedroom Tax’ whilst her fellow Brazilian citizens were subject to some of the worse housing conditions in the world!
Just like the EU, the UN is populated with a wide variety of unproductive busybodies determined to impose nirvana upon a world which is a million miles away from perfection. What was the UN doing spending time on Assange – who is obviously guilty of something, otherwise he wouldn’t impose exile upon himself – when North Korea are about to test another atomic bomb?
COWARDS! – Just like the EU. Just like HMRC! Just like the police!
Go after the small guys, but leave the REAL troublemakers well alone. They’re too dangerous!
E
Because the UN is yet another anti Western organisation which is administered by trough snuffling, overpaid, lazy, corrupt, lefty fat cats.
Paid for, mostly by Western nations. Cash which is mostly wasted or misused.
Notice its similarity to Albeeb and the EU?
Why not offer the traitors Assange/Snowden/Greenwald immunity in return to monitor and spy on and provide intelligence on mosques?
They’re clearly quite good at deception and MI 5 seem to have no stomach to do it?
I would point out that the “rape” which Assange is accused of seems to revolve around not using a condom during consensual sex. It seems the Swedish definiton of rape is quite wide when it suits them, though strangely Malmo seems to have become the rape capital of Europe. I wonder how that came about?
If Assange is being unlawfully detained, I want to know who by? He is clearly not being detained by the British or any British agency as he is currently resident on Ecuadorian soil. And it is the British police who would be happiest if he were to leave his place of “involuntary detainment”. I think all Assange’s supporters should start one of their hysterical petitions to pressure the Ecuadorian authorities to kick him out of their embassy.
The notion that he is a political prisoner is utterly fanciful delusion. Chances are, if he had been arrested by the police and handed over to Sweden, instead of hiding from the charges against him, inside the Ecuadorian Embassy, he would be enjoying his liberty by now.
I know how he could guarantee being freed. He should self-select his gender as female and convert to Islam. Then he could walk out of their in a burkha so the British police would not touch him, and being Muslim, the police in Sweden would not dare charge him with rape, and would drop the extradition notice.
If his delusional, lefty tin-foil-hat wearing conspiracy nutter acolytes have not thought of that yet, then he deserves to rot in there. It IS absolutely his own choice.
If the UN hasn’t jumped the shark before, it certainly has now. What utter rubbish.