Forum libero

Scritto da:
> se uno che non usa il preservativo come Assange è uno stupratore ..allora sai quanti stupri

Pare che in realtà si tratti di una bufala montata ad arte dai pulotti per incastrare Assange, nel senso che nessuna delle due donne ha effettivamente denunciato uno stupro, anzi, loro stesse si sono stupite del casino che ne è saltato fuori dato che volevano SOLO sapere se Assange ha o no l'HIV.

https://justice4assange.com/

Is Mr. Assange accused of ’rape’?

Over the past year, new information has emerged that both women explicitly deny having been raped by Mr. Assange. In a statement to the UK Supreme Court, the prosecutor acknowledged that the complainants wished only to ask the police for advice about HIV tests, having discovered they’d had both had sex with Mr. Assange. (There has never been an allegation Mr. Assange has HIV.) Neither of the women wished to lodge a formal complaint.

The woman of whom Mr. Assange is accused of the offence of "lesser rape" (a technical term in Swedish law) sent an SMS to a friend saying that she "did not want to accuse JA [of] anything" and "it was the police who made up the charges".

The other woman tweeted in 2013 that she had never been raped. Both women’s testimonies say that they consented to the sex. A senior prosecutor already dismissed the ’rape’ accusation, saying that there were no grounds for accusing Mr. Assange on this basis. But a third prosecutor, lobbied by a politician who was running for attorney general, took over the investigation and resurrected the accusations against Mr. Assange. Due to the great number of incorrect reports of, it is best to rely on primary source documents in this matter, which are on the internet and the UK Supreme Court "Agreed Statements of Facts" agreed to by the UK, the Swedish authoritiesm and Mr. Assange’s legal team.

Insomma, come si è sempre sospettato, era solo una scusa per intrappolare Assange per poi probabilmente spedirlo in USA. Questo per quanto riguarda la Svezia.

Per quello che riguarda gli UK la cosa è ancora più schifosa perché dopo aver chiesto (ed ottenuto) l'asilo politico da parte dell'Ecuador gli UK AVEVANO L'OBBLIGO di lasciar stare Assange e permettergli di trasferirsi in Ecuador.

International law says that a sovereign country has decided to recognise Mr. Assange as needing protection from political persecution on humanitarian grounds. Mr. Assange has a right to meaningfully exercise that protection through passage to Ecuador. Ecuador invoked a number of applicable conventions, including the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees. The United Kingdom and Sweden are also parties to the 1951 Convention and are obligated to recognise the asylum decision of Ecuador. While both states have been careful to avoid saying that they do not recognise the asylum, their actions can only be interpreted as a wilful violation of Mr. Assange’s right to ’seek, receive and enjoy’ his asylum. In international law, the obligation to protect persons from persecution under the 1951 Refugee Convention prevails over extradition agreements between states.

Anche le Nazioni Unite si sono espresse al riguardo condannado gli UK per il comportamento tenuto dicendo che stanno di fatto tenendo illegalmente Assange prigioniero sul loro territorio.

https://justice4assange.com/UN-Working-Group-on-Ar...

Quindi non si tratta affatto di un caso di stupro, né reale né teorico, ma di un vero tentativo di incastrarlo in cui sia Svezia che UK hanno violato i suoi diritti umani base e la legge internazionale perché entrambe i paesi sono pupazzi in mano agli USA.

**Modificato dall'autore il 11.12.2016 16:33**