The Politics/Religion/Conspiracies Deathmatch Thread

[The Dunster]

Foster didnt have anywhere near 'overwhelming evidence'. He had one side of the argument. ok, thats fine, but countries have judicial processes to go through dont they? Is it Australias bizness to decide who is or isnt guilty of a crime in another country.

Member is correct in that we sure seem to pick and choose our targets. Assange was the darling of the hippies when he outed the warmongers, but the second he unloaded on their girl Hillary, he became a leper. Its almost as if they loved the truth coming out......just not 'all' the truth.

Assange ended up with no mates, despite at one time getting cheered on by everyone.

They accused the bloke of a crime he couldn't have committed because he was playing in a football game at the time.

The reason they could help him out is because he was being illegally detained according to International Law - not Australian law.

The Assange case is completely different and trying to link the two cases as similar is pretty poor form.

Assange could be brought up on any number of charges and until we know them the Australian government can't do jack.

My personal opinion is that Assange is no better than the people he writes about.

Edit: Assange having to stand trial for this https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr...53481/download is now a possibility.