Posts by Steve Parks
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Behaving badly at the bottom…, in reply to Russell Brown,
[Graeme] I cannot see the reason for a judge alone trial being anything other than “the trial is likely to take three months, and the chance that with a jury that it would be more complicated, and take longer, and possibly have to be abandoned would be substantially higher than normal”.
Pretty good guess. It seems the defence argued in its turn that decisions made by a judge only would be less readily accepted.
It does strike me that the judge could have revealed more … even if only by structuring the text of the original decision to facilitate that course.
What baffles me is why on earth the judge would continue the suppression of the reasoning for the ‘judge only’ trial ruling, if it were for such a straightforward reason.
-
-
Hard News: Wikileaks: The Cable Guys, in reply to Simon Grigg,
has been debunked by Wikileaks.
Except as pointed out by Sacha the debunking has been debunked.
For the record, it was Seriatim who made that point.
-
Hard News: Wikileaks: The Cable Guys, in reply to James Bremner,
James, are you okay with the Wikileaks then? Let the public see this stuff, and they can make their own decision on the material, just as you have assessed it in a fairly favourable way for the USA.
-
180 Seconds with Craig Ranapia - 12 December, in reply to Christiaan,
I certainly oppose his extradition to the USA.
(And oops, I meant "deferential", before.)
-
there’s always the potential outcome of these alleged crimes that don’t involve lying: they got bad advice, the prosecutors got it wrong, etc.
Which is a good point: we shouldn’t assume that they are liars even if it goes to trial and he’s found not guilty.
Going back to the original point of contention here, I really didn’t take Craig’s sans alleged ‘rape victims’ phrase as being a sneaky way to imply Assange’s guilt, or a Freudian slip. (Sometimes, slips are just slips.)
All you had to do Craig was admit that you perhaps could have used more accurate language
Maybe, but all you had to say was that you think people need to be careful with their language when discussing these issues. It seems to me you went a bit further & your case started out more confrontational than necessary: “practice what you preach” always sounds didactic. And “it seems that so far he is not receiving a fair trial. No comment from you on that” was a bit odd – it’s “180 seconds with Craig Ranapia” and he made it pretty clear what particular issue caught his interest here.
Anyway, while I had question marks over the initial decision not to grant bail, I wouldn’t go so far as to say he hasn’t been given a “fair trail”, so far.
I don’t get why it’s been suggested you think the woman are lying, or why you portray Craig and Boganette’s stance as being naively differential to the US.
-
Hard News: The Wellington Cables, in reply to Kyle Matthews,
arguing about how a possible rape relates to Wikipedia
Do you mean WikiLeaks, or have I missed something? (I may well have missed something as I haven’t read though this thread very thoroughly.)
-
Hard News: Wikileaks: The Cable Guys, in reply to Sacha,
Ahem, award winning.
But seriously, well, umm… not so seriously, I liked this bit of satire from Daily Mash (not directly related to the topic at hand):
Julian Cook, professor of freedom at Delingpole University, rejected claims that the Teapot movement is intellectual monkey shit led by manipulative scum and generally followed by people who don’t know where Europe is.
He said: “It has been grotesquely misrepresented, especially by dishonest, ideologically bankrupt know-it-alls who have shamelessly read and listened to what the Teapotters have actually said.
“The typical Teapotter is a modern-day Thomas Jefferson, an intellectual colossus who is exercising the freedom to believe that Canada is next to Germany and that God made fish.
…“It is not about racism or religion, it is about freedom from big government, it is about living your life the way you want to, unless of course you and your gay partner want to get married or you’re a woman who wants to choose whether or not she grows something in her womb."
But I digress. As you were.
-
Hard News: Wikileaks: The Cable Guys, in reply to Steve Parks,
And more 'it's just inane chatter' claims:
Paul Holmes is an award-winning Herald on Sunday columnist, just so you know.
-
Hard News: Wikileaks: The Cable Guys, in reply to Simon Grigg,
Since the inane chatter that nothing of importance has come out of these cables seems to persist
Yes, as Mike Hosking put it in a question to former CIA agent Ray McGovern in this interview, what has WikiLeaks given us apart from "diplomatic tittle tattle"? Quite a lot, actually. (Though it seemed not to sink in too quickly for Mike, who felt the need to ask basically the same question again.)