Doesn't that work both ways? Maybe you could make a suggestion that the Slashdot editors post a notice about what views will be considered acceptable for any particular discussion. They should also post what the music will be since that will be choir practice, not a discussion. How often do you learn things from a choir? There are many people that share my views, just not many that post on Slashdot for its international audience.
First, that post wasn't a response to me. Second, posting bad arguments and opinions contrary to the facts "hundreds of times" doesn't make them good arguments or factual. I can be persuaded, but you have to be right to do it. Maybe you've heard that two wrongs don't make a right? Well neither does ten thousand wrongs make a right.
Those records are considered ordinary business records. That question has been to the Supreme Court before. The government doesn't legally need a warrant to get them.
He hasn't been questioned by the current prosecutor. The trial, if any, would follow charges, and those would follow questioning by the current prosecutor. Not complicated.
Why bring him back to Sweden? You don't suppose it could be due to the likelihood of going forward with a trial, do you? That's hard to do if Assange isn't there. I also seem to recall someone posting that a clock starts ticking once he is actually charged - speedy trial and all that - and Assagne could run out the clock by staying in the embassy.
Ecuador is playing games. They know how the Swedish legal system works and are exploiting people's ignorance of the order in which the steps occur. First comes the interview, then the charges. They know that. Like I wrote, Ecuador is playing games if they actually stated that.
Have you ever heard of the "presumption of innocence"? It is morally and legally wrong to imply that Assange committed any crime, until he has been convicted in a court of law.
For some reason that presumption rarely seems to be honored for the people that Assange steals or traffics in secrets from. Same goes for Snowden.
If they plan to change and try him after the formal interview it doesn't help if he is in the embassy in the UK instead of Sweden. In fact leaving him in the embassy in the UK thwarts justice.
Before you go down the conspiracy theory rabbit hole perhaps you could explain why the US would wait to extradict him from Sweden in the indefinite fututre instead of extradicting him from friendly US ally Britain now? You believe nonsense.
Yes, sometimes proposing a new currency to replace the dollar will turn people into rapists.
Well "NotDrWho," since you are apparently new to this dimension I'll take a moment to explain a few things to you. In this dimension it sometimes happens that rapists and abusers of women happen to be accomplished practioners of some useful trade. Some people will even overlook their abusive behavior towards women due to the fame or power that they achieve in their trade. When they finally get called out for it some people will invent excuses and apologize for the rapists. You seem to be getting information from that sort. You should reconsider that.
Perhaps it wouldn't occur to you, but rapists and other abusers to women might at times do other things, such as leak juicy documents you have an interest in, or forment monetary policy.
When will you be journeying back to your home world / dimension? It might not be safe for you here, you seem susceptible to rabid ideas.
He is not even charged. That is the insanity. They have not lodged changes, they just want to question him. Insane that they can issue an arrest warrant without associated charges
Under the Swedish legal system ( like some others on the continent) he has to be questioned by the prosecutor before formal charges can be filed. They are attempting to do this now. Assange refuses to cooperate.
Libertarian meant toll sidewalks and "blacks only" toilets.
And you probably think it was "famous" "Libertarian" politicians like George Wallace and Bull Connor that were responsible, right? Oh, did I write Libertarian? How silly, they were DEMOCRATS.
I can't decide if you are simply trolling or suffering from dementia.
But you don't understand, in the post 9-11 world we don't assess the real risks. Only the imaginary ones. And end up paying billions/trillions of dollars for nothing.
In the post 9-11 era many people (including many on Slashdot) claim that real risks are imaginary.
For some people if it didn't happen to them it didn't happen at all.
One of the reasons we end up paying billions/trillions "for nothing" is the propensity of some to throw away hard won gains. You can see that in Iraq. A previous example was Viet Nam, which could have turned out like Korea but for the craven behavior of the party controlling Congress.
Perhaps Congress could start by dissolving the enivronment that has caused so many people to want to do antisocial things like harming a President, who is mostly supposed to be a CEO of the government, and occasionally lead a defensive war against the country.
I find it amusing that you think Congress can vote mental illness and evil intent out of existence.
No, the drones are disrupting terrorist organizations by killing their leaders and technical experts. If the terrorists are afraid of that then it is mainly a side benefit.
Slashdot Mirror
Doesn't that work both ways? Maybe you could make a suggestion that the Slashdot editors post a notice about what views will be considered acceptable for any particular discussion. They should also post what the music will be since that will be choir practice, not a discussion. How often do you learn things from a choir? There are many people that share my views, just not many that post on Slashdot for its international audience.
First, that post wasn't a response to me. Second, posting bad arguments and opinions contrary to the facts "hundreds of times" doesn't make them good arguments or factual. I can be persuaded, but you have to be right to do it. Maybe you've heard that two wrongs don't make a right? Well neither does ten thousand wrongs make a right.
Those records are considered ordinary business records. That question has been to the Supreme Court before. The government doesn't legally need a warrant to get them.
That's not building a case. Care to do that?
He hasn't been questioned by the current prosecutor. The trial, if any, would follow charges, and those would follow questioning by the current prosecutor. Not complicated.
Why bring him back to Sweden? You don't suppose it could be due to the likelihood of going forward with a trial, do you? That's hard to do if Assange isn't there. I also seem to recall someone posting that a clock starts ticking once he is actually charged - speedy trial and all that - and Assagne could run out the clock by staying in the embassy.
Sorry, but no. Those claims are often made against specific people, so where is that presumption of innocence?
Ecuador is playing games. They know how the Swedish legal system works and are exploiting people's ignorance of the order in which the steps occur. First comes the interview, then the charges. They know that. Like I wrote, Ecuador is playing games if they actually stated that.
Have you ever heard of the "presumption of innocence"? It is morally and legally wrong to imply that Assange committed any crime, until he has been convicted in a court of law.
For some reason that presumption rarely seems to be honored for the people that Assange steals or traffics in secrets from. Same goes for Snowden.
He is wanted on a warrant and jumped bail, fleeing police custody. As I wrote, he is a fugitive from justice.
If they plan to charge and try him after the interview then he needs to be in Sweden, not in the embassy in the UK. Funny? Not so much.
If they plan to change and try him after the formal interview it doesn't help if he is in the embassy in the UK instead of Sweden. In fact leaving him in the embassy in the UK thwarts justice.
The investigation was continued by another prosecutor at the insistence of the women. The charges are the same.
Law of large numbers. You abuse or rape enough women and eventually there is likely to be consequences even if not perfect justice.
Before you go down the conspiracy theory rabbit hole perhaps you could explain why the US would wait to extradict him from Sweden in the indefinite fututre instead of extradicting him from friendly US ally Britain now? You believe nonsense.
Questioning the accused is the next step in the Swedish legal process before charges can be filed. A trial would follow that.
Yes, sometimes proposing a new currency to replace the dollar will turn people into rapists.
Well "NotDrWho," since you are apparently new to this dimension I'll take a moment to explain a few things to you. In this dimension it sometimes happens that rapists and abusers of women happen to be accomplished practioners of some useful trade. Some people will even overlook their abusive behavior towards women due to the fame or power that they achieve in their trade. When they finally get called out for it some people will invent excuses and apologize for the rapists. You seem to be getting information from that sort. You should reconsider that.
Perhaps it wouldn't occur to you, but rapists and other abusers to women might at times do other things, such as leak juicy documents you have an interest in, or forment monetary policy.
When will you be journeying back to your home world / dimension? It might not be safe for you here, you seem susceptible to rabid ideas.
Assange is wanted in the UK as a fugitive from justice.
He is not even charged. That is the insanity. They have not lodged changes, they just want to question him. Insane that they can issue an arrest warrant without associated charges
Under the Swedish legal system ( like some others on the continent) he has to be questioned by the prosecutor before formal charges can be filed. They are attempting to do this now. Assange refuses to cooperate.
This is character assassination.
We won't know until the trial, will we? Perhaps there is a reason Assange refuses to go to trial to clear his name.
Liberal meant smaller unobtrusive government.
Not anytime recently in the US.
Libertarian meant toll sidewalks and "blacks only" toilets.
And you probably think it was "famous" "Libertarian" politicians like George Wallace and Bull Connor that were responsible, right? Oh, did I write Libertarian? How silly, they were DEMOCRATS.
I can't decide if you are simply trolling or suffering from dementia.
But you don't understand, in the post 9-11 world we don't assess the real risks. Only the imaginary ones.
And end up paying billions/trillions of dollars for nothing.
In the post 9-11 era many people (including many on Slashdot) claim that real risks are imaginary.
For some people if it didn't happen to them it didn't happen at all.
Terrorism deaths rose 60% in 2013, independent study says
One of the reasons we end up paying billions/trillions "for nothing" is the propensity of some to throw away hard won gains. You can see that in Iraq. A previous example was Viet Nam, which could have turned out like Korea but for the craven behavior of the party controlling Congress.
Some people never learn until it is too late.
Perhaps Congress could start by dissolving the enivronment that has caused so many people to want to do antisocial things like harming a President, who is mostly supposed to be a CEO of the government, and occasionally lead a defensive war against the country.
I find it amusing that you think Congress can vote mental illness and evil intent out of existence.
No, the drones are disrupting terrorist organizations by killing their leaders and technical experts. If the terrorists are afraid of that then it is mainly a side benefit.
The average person in America isn't likely to be the specific target of a truck bomb attack. Federal buildings, on the other hand ....
Saddam's Iraq continued to work on extended range rockets in violation of various agreements and sanctions.