Posts by Christiaan
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
No rewrite required Craig. All you need to do is pull your head out.
-
All you had to do Craig was admit that you perhaps could have used more accurate language (particularly in this case where you were apparently trying to make a point about someone’s presumed innocence) but instead you’ve both gone off on an embarrassing diatribe that the word “alleged” means to accuse someone of lying.
Your reaction has only confirmed for me that it probably was a Freudian slip and you have indeed made your mind up about Assange's guilt.
The strangest thing about your line of thought Boganette is that you've clearly already made your mind up that the accusers can't possibly be lying. Hence Assange must be lying.
-
Ironing your star spangled blindfold I suspect.
-
I'll add too that referring to them as alleged isn't accusing them of anything. It's called reserving judgement.
-
They're cheap. About as cheap as they come. Calling people "victims" in a court case, of any kind, before that court case has run it's course is not cheap however.
To voice concern that WikiLeaks' enemies are using these charges, whether true or not, 'for political agendas that have nothing to do with women’s safety' is not to imply that the accusers are liars (I state categorically that I don't think that and I'm sure Axelsson would too), It is to voice concern that WikiLeaks' enemies are using these charges for political agendas that have nothing to do with women’s safety.
Calling the alleged rape victims "rape victims" plays into the hands of those trying to use these allegations to attack WikiLeaks.
-
Spare me your cheap semantics. Tagging "allegedly" onto to your own accusations doesn't relinquish your responsibility for them.
You say he isn't getting a fair trial and claim the "U.S. blathers about indicting him so they can kidnap and torture him" - and then claim you're not into into conspiracy theories and the charges are 'conincidental'.
Have you stopped to think for a minute that these charges might be true AND that the U.S. (and other powers) might seek to take advantage of them for political purposes?
-
-
Yes, I'm sure you're well positioned to lecture me about taking ownership of my words... while you shove them down my throat.
So what do you make of these words of mine? "I don't see these rape allegations as anything more than coincidental."
-
And perhaps you'd care to take your accusation up with Katrin Axelsson: http://www.womenagainstrape.net/comment/reply/410#comment-form They're her words not mine.
-
Wow, well, what do I know? You already know what I know before I do. No matter that I say the opposite. I'm clearly just a lying weasel misogynous scumbag who needs to be told what he's really thinking and you're a paragon of feminist virtue sticking up for that most virtuous of underdogs America.
I've never had a such a disingenuous exchange of words in my life. I've already stated on this very webpage that I think the allegations are coincidental not conspiratorial. But hey, what the fuck does it matter what I say about what I think? That's what you're here for.