• WikiLeaks: Julian Assange supporters release video diary of six month 'house arrest'
    32 replies, posted
[quote=The Telegraph] The five-minute video shows Mr Assange repeatedly signing in at a local police station near to where he is living in Suffolk. On two occasions he is wearing green Wellington boots as he goes to sign the daily register, which is part of his bail conditions. The film shows him flicking through the book which he has to sign. He also has to be back indoors by 10pm. The video shows the WikiLeaks founder, who is fighting extradition to Sweden over sexual assault allegations which he denies, being fitted with an electronic tag. On one occasion his team attempted to film staff from Serco visiting the house to check one of the three monitoring boxes that check Mr Assange’s movements. They ask Mr Assange to stop the filming. He replies: “No sorry they are filming.” The staff member says she cannot carry on while being filmed. Mr Assange asks: “Why not? What is your company afraid of? Why would your company be afraid of the general public?” In the video, Mr Assange is shown working at a laptop at his desk, in shirt sleeves. One of his staff Sarah Harrison says: “I am British. And I have always been proud of our justice system – but this is just wrong. “This is a man who has not even be charged and he is being treated like a caged animal.” Another supporter Joseph Farrell says: “This man has not been charged with a crime”, adding that he is being treated as though he has been.” [/quote] Source: [url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8579463/WikiLeaks-Julian-Assange-supporters-release-video-diary-of-six-month-house-arrest.html[/url] AND A VIDEO: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCNzU3u7G3o[/media] Well, at least there's a little comfort! But fuck having going to the police station everyday.
This is ridiculous. You don't do this to a person that hasn't even been charged with anything.
[QUOTE]Mr Assange asks: “Why not? What is your company afraid of? Why would your company be afraid of the general public?”[/QUOTE] Sorry but that would piss me off as well. Not wanting to be filmed every moment you're trying to work does not mean you're doing something wrong. It's just annoying as hell and people take it to mean that you're doing something so horrible you don't want it to be accountable. On the other hand this is a bit excessive, and ridiculous for someone like Assange to have to do. I feel like he's probably just having to follow a rule that is generally meant to apply to much more severe offenders, but it's not really right to make exceptions just because lots of people agree with what he did, etc.
Look, I know he was accused of rape, I know he's the founder of WikiLeaks, I know people want him dead for what he did, but you're holding an innocent man hostage, basically. And I may be making a stretch here, but Hitler was an innocent man as well. He only 'told' people to do these things. This however doesn't make him a total monster for doing so... but he is a much different case by a long shot. Assange doesn't come even close to Hitler. i'm saying this of course because all Assange did was tell people things, just like Hitler. (Again, thats the only contrast they have, Assange is still nothing like him, there are a thousand different people I could note, but Hitler was the first that came to mind).
what is it with countries and julian assange. you could probably drop this guy in zimbabwe and people would still try to torch his house.
[QUOTE=Canesfan;30521895]Sorry but that would piss me off as well. Not wanting to be filmed every moment you're trying to work does not mean you're doing something wrong. It's just annoying as hell and people take it to mean that you're doing something so horrible you don't want it to be accountable. On the other hand this is a bit excessive, and ridiculous for someone like Assange to have to do. I feel like he's probably just having to follow a rule that is generally meant to apply to much more severe offenders, but it's not really right to make exceptions just because lots of people agree with what he did, etc.[/QUOTE] I don't think it's a case of it pissing them off, it's that they said they [i]can't[/i] work while being filmed, not that they [i]wont[/i]. It seemed to me like it was a company policy to not carry out their job if they're being filmed or something along those lines. Besides, whatever the reason for that was, the Wikileaks people did bring up a good point in that their company specialises in surveillance and yet they refuse to work if being filmed.
[QUOTE=Destroyertf;30521733]This is ridiculous. You don't do this to a person that hasn't even been charged with anything.[/QUOTE] [img]http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2010/06/Brad-Manning-in-uniform.jpg[/img]
house arrest refers to when you are allowed to be only on your own property and designated areas (job, etc.). it does not mean having to sign in at a police station every day, being followed around and forced to be home by 10 (this is the stupidest one of them, no form of house arrest has laws regulating what time you have to be home by). also, he probably should've had time taken off for good behaviour. six months with no incidents.
[QUOTE=CjienX;30522213][img]http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2010/06/Brad-Manning-in-uniform.jpg[/img] [/QUOTE] :smith: forgot about him.
is he still being hosed down in his underwear in a 3x3 cell? last i heard about him was last year.
[QUOTE=GrabbinPills;30522295]is he still being hosed down in his underwear in a 3x3 cell? last i heard about him was last year.[/QUOTE] I've yet to hear that he's been released, so I can only assume nothing has changed
This is wrong. Whoever is doing this must be stripped of any semblance of power, so they can never do anything like this ever again. Why is it that the cowards keep him metaphorically chained like this? Someone should just DO something about this madness, free him from his prison, and ensure eternal impotence, an eternal lack of doing anything significant, to fall upon the heads of his jailors. They keep him chained so because he is willing to expose the wrongs of government, something that the cowards are too deathly afraid of, being the cowards that they are. But still, at least he's being treated better than poor old Bradley Manning or whoever that guy was.
[QUOTE=CjienX;30522213][img]http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2010/06/Brad-Manning-in-uniform.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Sorry, but who's this guy and what happened to him?
[QUOTE=ionuttzu;30522389]Sorry, but who's this guy and what happened to him?[/QUOTE] Bradley Manning, the guy that leaked the shit to Wikileaks. He's been kept in a 3x3 cell in completely inhuman conditions without even formally being charged yet.
[QUOTE=CjienX;30522442]Bradley Manning, the guy that leaked the shit to Wikileaks. He's been kept in a 3x3 cell in completely inhuman conditions without even formally being charged yet.[/QUOTE] Actually, they don't even know it as fact that he did, from what I understand.
[QUOTE=J!NX;30522467]Actually, they don't even know it as fact that he did, from what I understand.[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure that Julian confirmed it when he acknowledged it, but that doesn't justify anything.
@ the police station: drug test
he's internet connection sucked
[QUOTE=Canesfan;30521895]Sorry but that would piss me off as well. Not wanting to be filmed every moment you're trying to work does not mean you're doing something wrong. It's just annoying as hell and people take it to mean that you're doing something so horrible you don't want it to be accountable.[/QUOTE] It's house arrest, meaning this is Assange's own property, is it not?
[QUOTE=Zeke129;30528534]It's house arrest, meaning this is Assange's own property, is it not?[/QUOTE] It's one of Assange's friends, iirc. Also, Assange is obviously being treated wrongly, but Manning is going through hell. It just pisses me off how we can get away with locking up a man, a citizen of our nation and someone in the military, without a trial, in a maximum security military prison, without clothes, for 23 hours a day, and no outside contact or human contact besides his lawyer and his guards, because he saw something immoral and covered up by our military and said "This isn't right, we shouldn't hide this." Fuck that.
You guys should probably know that [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning#Detention_at_Fort_Leavenworth]Bradley Manning has been transferred to a lower security prison[/url] and is being treated like any other prisoner now
[QUOTE=smurfy;30529033]You guys should probably know that [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning#Detention_at_Fort_Leavenworth]Bradley Manning has been transferred to a lower security prison[/url] and is being treated like any other prisoner now[/QUOTE] I thought *most* prisoners were given a trial
[QUOTE=GrabbinPills;30522251]house arrest refers to when you are allowed to be only on your own property and designated areas (job, etc.). it does not mean having to sign in at a police station every day, being followed around and forced to be home by 10 (this is the stupidest one of them, no form of house arrest has laws regulating what time you have to be home by). also, he probably should've had time taken off for good behaviour. six months with no incidents.[/QUOTE] This isn't house arrest in the typical (US) sense, this is how people are bailed in the UK (in most cases) while they are awaiting trial (or in Assange's case extradition). House arrest suggests some sort of punishment, which in most cases in the UK it is not used for that its used for making sure people don't flee (or commit terrorism, but that's an entirely different matter). He simply has a curfew and must stay at a specific place after a certain time. [editline]18th June 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Trainbike;30522098]I don't think it's a case of it pissing them off, it's that they said they [i]can't[/i] work while being filmed, not that they [i]wont[/i]. It seemed to me like it was a company policy to not carry out their job if they're being filmed or something along those lines. Besides, whatever the reason for that was, the Wikileaks people did bring up a good point in that their company specialises in surveillance and yet they refuse to work if being filmed.[/QUOTE] It wouldn't surprise me if that was the case to be honest, I assume that the stuff they are working on is meant to be secure.
[QUOTE=Icedshot;30529200]I thought *most* prisoners were given a trial[/QUOTE] Have you heard of Guantanamo Bay?
[QUOTE=J!NX;30521977]And I may be making a stretch here, but [B]Hitler was an innocent man as well[/B]. He only 'told' people to do these things.[/QUOTE] :godwin:
[QUOTE=smurfy;30529033]You guys should probably know that [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning#Detention_at_Fort_Leavenworth]Bradley Manning has been transferred to a lower security prison[/url] and is being treated like any other prisoner now[/QUOTE] And what about his right to a fair trial within a reasonable amount of time?
Don't know what you guys are talking about with Manning not being charged [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning#Arrest_and_charges[/URL] [editline]18th June 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=ultra_bright;30531555]And what about his right to a fair trial within a reasonable amount of time?[/QUOTE] It depends on his case; but considering they transferred him to a lower security prison is so he can recover from the trauma and stand trial, its reasonable to assume it won't be long. But I would agree its been far too long already. However they're allowed to do this because of his unstable condition for the past 9 months hes been in.
[QUOTE=Saxon;30537119]Don't know what you guys are talking about with Manning not being charged [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning#Arrest_and_charges[/url] [/QUOTE] Being charged and being convicted are different. He hasn't had a trial yet.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;30537240]Being charged and being convicted are different. He hasn't had a trial yet.[/QUOTE] and? People where saying he hasn't been charged and they're wrong.
[QUOTE=Saxon;30537265]and? People where saying he hasn't been charged and they're wrong.[/QUOTE] I think they were using the wrong term, it seemed to me that they meant convicted just by how they were saying it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.