Profile
Search
Register
Log in
Wikileaks just released a serious whistleblower video...
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > Social stuff. Political stuff. KNOWMORE

Author Message
IAmNiki



Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 1605
Location: North Smithfield, RI
 Reply with quote  

I've yet to hear anyone say that "what he's doing" is irrelevant because of the sexual assault charges. It always seems like the people that are quick to dismiss the claims of these women are more likely to ignore his sexual assault allegations in favor of the leaked information rather than the other way around.

It's perfectly plausible to support the information leaks while still finding the guy to be a creep and acknowledging that he could have done something very, very wrong. So you think he's your hero for doing something against the government... but your hero might also be a rapist. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it didn't happen. It would be great if people stopped brushing aside potential rape charges just because someone did something controversial that they agree with.

Also, the guy became an international sensation. It seems to make perfect sense to me that INTERPOL would go after him on the rape claims. I guess it would have been better if those claims were ignored though since he is obviously innocent since he did something to please the counter-culture kids right?
Post Sat Dec 18, 2010 12:11 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Charlie Foxtrot



Joined: 23 Jan 2008
Posts: 1379
Location: Rochester, NY
 Reply with quote  

Interpol's job is to go after the world's most dangerous criminals, not the most famous ones. They never issue warrants for rapists, regardless of their fame. The warrant is extremely unusual, leading many to believe it's politically motivated.

Also, given the lack of information we have about the rape charges, no one should assume Assange's guilt or innocence. That being said, he has yet to be charged with anything--the warrant is for questioning.
Post Sat Dec 18, 2010 2:37 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
IAmNiki



Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 1605
Location: North Smithfield, RI
 Reply with quote  

Charlie Foxtrot wrote:
Interpol's job is to go after the world's most dangerous criminals, not the most famous ones. They never issue warrants for rapists, regardless of their fame. The warrant is extremely unusual, leading many to believe it's politically motivated.

Also, given the lack of information we have about the rape charges, no one should assume Assange's guilt or innocence. That being said, he has yet to be charged with anything--the warrant is for questioning.


That's what I'm saying. No one should assume him guilty or innocent at this point regardless of personal opinion on his wikileaks activity, but people do and invalidate the claims of women who could be victims of rape and sexual assault.
Post Sat Dec 18, 2010 2:55 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Bandini
WIZARD APPRENTICE


Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 4669
Location: jerk city
 Reply with quote  

Niki is on point here. Some of you are using painfully flawed logic.

Jared Paul wrote:
Just sayin', man. There's an awful lot of media hype surrounding the private life of Wikileaks' founder, and not so much focus on the content of the actual leaks.


This is not true. In past few days, the focus has shifted to the allegations, but that's because he was arrested and then released. It's the news.

Jared Paul wrote:

Sexual Assault is a tragically under reported, and under prosecuted crime in Sweden, and in the U.S. It happens every day yet almost never receives national coverage, nor results in the placing of offenders on Most Wanted lists. Even less is done by the media or either government to allocate the resources, provide the education, or institute the reforms necessary to end this epidemic...

So why then are these media outlets and governments that have been ignoring hundreds (maybe thousands) of incidents of sexual assault a day suddenly so concerned about this one case?



You think the media should be reporting “hundreds (maybe thousands)” of sexual assaults a day? That's just silly! The media reports when celebrities get accused of rape. Julian Assange is one of the most polarizing, famous, and significant (for better or worse) persons in the world. Of course the media are going to report the hell out of the allegations. And how does the media reporting this (over report it, in your mind) harm efforts to curb sexual assault? If anything, it brings attention to it.

It seems pretty clear to me, though I have yet to see any evidence of it, that political pressure is leading to more aggressive efforts to prosecute Assange. If he is guilty, I don’t have a problem with that. If he isn't, it would concern me. But I don't have a clue as to his guilt or innocence and so don’t really feel one way or the other about Sweden going after him.
Post Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:06 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
crash



Joined: 07 Aug 2003
Posts: 5456
Location: the chocolate city with a marshmallow center and a graham cracker crust of corruption
 Reply with quote  

IAmNiki wrote:
It's perfectly plausible to support the information leaks while still finding the guy to be a creep and acknowledging that he could have done something very, very wrong.

exactly.

the involvement of interpol is clearly political but i don't think that means the charges are spurious. of course, it's all speculation, but what isn't?
Post Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:17 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Charlie Foxtrot



Joined: 23 Jan 2008
Posts: 1379
Location: Rochester, NY
 Reply with quote  

IAmNiki wrote:
Charlie Foxtrot wrote:
Interpol's job is to go after the world's most dangerous criminals, not the most famous ones. They never issue warrants for rapists, regardless of their fame. The warrant is extremely unusual, leading many to believe it's politically motivated.

Also, given the lack of information we have about the rape charges, no one should assume Assange's guilt or innocence. That being said, he has yet to be charged with anything--the warrant is for questioning.


That's what I'm saying. No one should assume him guilty or innocent at this point regardless of personal opinion on his wikileaks activity, but people do and invalidate the claims of women who could be victims of rape and sexual assault.


You wrote: "It's perfectly plausible to support the information leaks while still finding the guy to be a creep and acknowledging that he could have done something very, very wrong."

The finding him to be a creep bit strikes me as presuming some amount of guilt.
Post Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:20 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Charlie Foxtrot



Joined: 23 Jan 2008
Posts: 1379
Location: Rochester, NY
 Reply with quote  

Bandini wrote:
It seems pretty clear to me, though I have yet to see any evidence of it, that political pressure is leading to more aggressive efforts to prosecute Assange. If he is guilty, I don’t have a problem with that. If he isn't, it would concern me.


You don't have a problem with police targeting people not based on their danger to society but based on which politicians they've rubbed the wrong way?
Post Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:21 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
IAmNiki



Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 1605
Location: North Smithfield, RI
 Reply with quote  

Honestly, I think it's really hard for people to admit someone that did something they wish they could do, could also be a rapist. Sorry if that is inconvienient when it comes to defending him, but the two acts should always be viewed as different, seperate things that are in no way related. Even if they went after him with more zeal than other people accused of rape.. even if it was politically motivated... it doesn't take away from the claims of the women. Its about them too at that point not just him. This vague sentiment of the assault charges being "bullshit" is both irritating and insanely disrespectful and insensitive.
Post Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:26 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
IAmNiki



Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 1605
Location: North Smithfield, RI
 Reply with quote  

Charlie Foxtrot wrote:
IAmNiki wrote:
Charlie Foxtrot wrote:
Interpol's job is to go after the world's most dangerous criminals, not the most famous ones. They never issue warrants for rapists, regardless of their fame. The warrant is extremely unusual, leading many to believe it's politically motivated.

Also, given the lack of information we have about the rape charges, no one should assume Assange's guilt or innocence. That being said, he has yet to be charged with anything--the warrant is for questioning.


That's what I'm saying. No one should assume him guilty or innocent at this point regardless of personal opinion on his wikileaks activity, but people do and invalidate the claims of women who could be victims of rape and sexual assault.


You wrote: "It's perfectly plausible to support the information leaks while still finding the guy to be a creep and acknowledging that he could have done something very, very wrong."

The finding him to be a creep bit strikes me as presuming some amount of guilt.


There are plenty of creepy people that are innocent. I'm calling him a creep based on the emails that have become public, not things he may or may not have done. Those emails are things he definately did participate in unless they were somehow faked.
Post Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:37 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Jared Paul



Joined: 15 Jul 2002
Posts: 3720
Location: www.PrayersForAtheists.org
 Reply with quote  

Charlie Foxtrot wrote:
Interpol's job is to go after the world's most dangerous criminals, not the most famous ones. They never issue warrants for rapists, regardless of their fame. The warrant is extremely unusual, leading many to believe it's politically motivated.

Also, given the lack of information we have about the rape charges, no one should assume Assange's guilt or innocence. That being said, he has yet to be charged with anything--the warrant is for questioning.


I think we can all agree that the allegations against Assange and the content of the leaks are two separate issues.

Claims of sexual assault need to be taken seriously in all instances and due process of the law has to be followed. However, I find the way that governments and media selectively cover, politicize, and exploit sexual assault when it suits their purpose to be very troubling. The UK women's group, Women Against Rape, has put out a statement addressing Assange's case that I feel is important to share:

http://www.womenagainstrape.net/content/additional-statement-women-against-rape-regarding-

Women who are fighting for justice for themselves or their children are astounded at the zeal with which Julian Assange has been pursued. Questions need to be asked about the authorities’ motivation when men who pose an obvious immediate danger to women and girls are treated more leniently.

In our 34 years of dealing with rape – including cases of extreme violence where women have suffered years of domestic violence and repeated rape sometimes at knife point – we have seen defendants let out on bail, and police and prosecutors biased against rape survivors. One of the women in our group has been fighting for justice for her daughter who was raped when she was under age; it took the police several months to arrest the man though they had his address. In those months he raped another young woman.

We have always stood against rape being used by anyone to promote political agendas which have nothing to do with justice and protection for women who have been raped or sexually assaulted. Attempts to use women’s deep feelings about rape to introduce repressive measures which undermine the rights of defendants are not uncommon. Rape survivors have not benefitted from such agendas: they have not improved the way rape is dealt with or the likelihood that rapists will be arrested and convicted.

Only 6.5% of all reported rapes in the UK lead to a conviction. In Sweden 90% of reported cases never come to court. Women seeking asylum from rape who have fled wars in the Congo, Uganda and other countries routinely face disbelief and threats of deportation back to the horrors they have fled.

While we cannot comment on the allegations against Mr Assange since we do not know the facts of the case, we do not condone attacks against the women who reported him. Whatever the merits of their allegations, it is not them but the criminal justice authorities in both Sweden and England who are responsible for the way in which these allegations are being dealt with. The authorities’ poor record in dealing with rape has given the go-ahead to claims that most women who report rape are liars. In fact, police and prosecutors are often the first to disbelieve women – we are fighting several cases of rape victims being imprisoned for making a false allegation after they reported rape but were disbelieved by the authorities.

In defence of women and girls, and of anyone who has suffered rape or sexual assault, we cannot allow political agendas to pervert our struggle for justice.
Post Sat Dec 18, 2010 4:30 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Bandini
WIZARD APPRENTICE


Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 4669
Location: jerk city
 Reply with quote  


Quote:


10 days in Sweden: the full allegations against Julian Assange

Unseen police documents provide the first complete account of the allegations against the WikiLeaks founder

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden

Documents seen by the Guardian reveal for the first time the full details of the allegations of rape and sexual assault that have led to extradition hearings against the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange.

The case against Assange, which has been the subject of intense speculation and dispute in mainstream media and on the internet, is laid out in police material held in Stockholm to which the Guardian received unauthorised access.

Assange, who was released on bail on Thursday, denies the Swedish allegations and has not formally been charged with any offence. The two Swedish women behind the charges have been accused by his supporters of making malicious complaints or being "honeytraps" in a wider conspiracy to discredit him.

Assange's UK lawyer, Mark Stephens, attributed the allegations to "dark forces", saying: "The honeytrap has been sprung ... After what we've seen so far you can reasonably conclude this is part of a greater plan." The journalist John Pilger dismissed the case as a "political stunt" and in an interview with ABC news, Assange said Swedish prosecutors were withholding evidence which suggested he had been "set up."

However, unredacted statements held by prosecutors in Stockholm, along with interviews with some of the central characters, shed fresh light on the hotly disputed sequence of events that has become the centre of a global storm.

Stephens has repeatedly complained that Assange has not been allowed to see the full allegations against him, but it is understood his Swedish defence team have copies of all the documents seen by the Guardian. He maintains that other potentially exculpatory evidence has not been made available to his team and may not have been seen by the Guardian.

The allegations centre on a 10-day period after Assange flew into Stockholm on Wednesday 11 August. One of the women, named in court as Miss A, told police that she had arranged Assange's trip to Sweden, and let him stay in her flat because she was due to be away. She returned early, on Friday 13 August, after which the pair went for a meal and then returned to her flat.

Her account to police, which Assange disputes, stated that he began stroking her leg as they drank tea, before he pulled off her clothes and snapped a necklace that she was wearing. According to her statement she "tried to put on some articles of clothing as it was going too quickly and uncomfortably but Assange ripped them off again". Miss A told police that she didn't want to go any further "but that it was too late to stop Assange as she had gone along with it so far", and so she allowed him to undress her.

According to the statement, Miss A then realised he was trying to have unprotected sex with her. She told police that she had tried a number of times to reach for a condom but Assange had stopped her by holding her arms and pinning her legs. The statement records Miss A describing how Assange then released her arms and agreed to use a condom, but she told the police that at some stage Assange had "done something" with the condom that resulted in it becoming ripped, and ejaculated without withdrawing.

When he was later interviewed by police in Stockholm, Assange agreed that he had had sex with Miss A but said he did not tear the condom, and that he was not aware that it had been torn. He told police that he had continued to sleep in Miss A's bed for the following week and she had never mentioned a torn condom.

On the following morning, Saturday 14 August, Assange spoke at a seminar organised by Miss A. A second woman, Miss W, had contacted Miss A to ask if she could attend. Both women joined Assange, the co-ordinator of the Swedish WikiLeaks group, whom we will call "Harold", and a few others for lunch.

Assange left the lunch with Miss W. She told the police she and Assange had visited the place where she worked and had then gone to a cinema where they had moved to the back row. He had kissed her and put his hands inside her clothing, she said.

That evening, Miss A held a party at her flat. One of her friends, "Monica", later told police that during the party Miss A had told her about the ripped condom and unprotected sex. Another friend told police that during the evening Miss A told her she had had "the worst sex ever" with Assange: "Not only had it been the world's worst screw, it had also been violent."

Assange's supporters point out that, despite her complaints against him, Miss A held a party for him on that evening and continued to allow him to stay in her flat.

On Sunday 15 August, Monica told police, Miss A told her that she thought Assange had torn the condom on purpose. According to Monica, Miss A said Assange was still staying in her flat but they were not having sex because he had "exceeded the limits of what she felt she could accept" and she did not feel safe.

The following day, Miss W phoned Assange and arranged to meet him late in the evening, according to her statement. The pair went back to her flat in Enkoping, near Stockholm. Miss W told police that though they started to have sex, Assange had not wanted to wear a condom, and she had moved away because she had not wanted unprotected sex. Assange had then lost interest, she said, and fallen asleep. However, during the night, they had both woken up and had sex at least once when "he agreed unwillingly to use a condom".

Early the next morning, Miss W told police, she had gone to buy breakfast before getting back into bed and falling asleep beside Assange. She had awoken to find him having sex with her, she said, but when she asked whether he was wearing a condom he said no. "According to her statement, she said: 'You better not have HIV' and he answered: 'Of course not,' " but "she couldn't be bothered to tell him one more time because she had been going on about the condom all night. She had never had unprotected sex before."

The police record of the interview with Assange in Stockhom deals only with the complaint made by Miss A. However, Assange and his lawyers have repeatedly stressed that he denies any kind of wrongdoing in relation to Miss W.

In submissions to the Swedish courts, they have argued that Miss W took the initiative in contacting Assange, that on her own account she willingly engaged in sexual activity in a cinema and voluntarily took him to her flat where, she agrees, they had consensual sex. They say that she never indicated to Assange that she did not want to have sex with him. They also say that in a text message to a friend, she never suggested she had been raped and claimed only to have been "half asleep".

Police spoke to Miss W's ex-boyfriend, who told them that in two and a half years they had never had sex without a condom because it was "unthinkable" for her. Miss W told police she went to a chemist to buy a morning-after pill and also went to hospital to be tested for STDs. Police statements record her contacting Assange to ask him to get a test and his refusing on the grounds that he did not have the time.

On Wednesday 18 August, according to police records, Miss A told Harold and a friend that Assange would not leave her flat and was sleeping in her bed, although she was not having sex with him and he spent most of the night sitting with his computer. Harold told police he had asked Assange why he was refusing to leave the flat and that Assange had said he was very surprised, because Miss A had not asked him to leave. Miss A says she spent Wednesday night on a mattress and then moved to a friend's flat so she did not have to be near him. She told police that Assange had continued to make sexual advances to her every day after they slept together and on Wednesday 18 August had approached her, naked from the waist down, and rubbed himself against her.

The following day, Harold told police, Miss A called him and for the first time gave him a full account of her complaints about Assange. Harold told police he regarded her as "very, very credible" and he confronted Assange, who said he was completely shocked by the claims and denied all of them. By Friday 20 August, Miss W had texted Miss A looking for help in finding Assange. The two women met and compared stories.

Harold has independently told the Guardian Miss A made a series of calls to him asking him to persuade Assange to take an STD test to reassure Miss W, and that Assange refused. Miss A then warned if Assange did not take a test, Miss W would go to the police. Assange had rejected this as blackmail, Harold told police.

Assange told police that Miss A spoke to him directly and complained to him that he had torn their condom, something that he regarded as false.

Late that Friday afternoon, Harold told police, Assange agreed to take a test, but the clinics had closed for the weekend. Miss A phoned Harold to say that she and Miss W had been to the police, who had told them that they couldn't simply tell Assange to take a test, that their statements must be passed to the prosecutor. That night, the story leaked to the Swedish newspaper Expressen.

By Saturday morning, 21 August, journalists were asking Assange for a reaction. At 9.15am, he tweeted: "We were warned to expect 'dirty tricks'. Now we have the first one." The following day, he tweeted: "Reminder: US intelligence planned to destroy WikiLeaks as far back as 2008."

The Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet asked if he had had sex with his two accusers. He said: "Their identities have been made anonymous so even I have no idea who they are. We have been warned that the Pentagon, for example, is thinking of deploying dirty tricks to ruin us."

Assange's Swedish lawyers have since suggested that Miss W's text messages – which the Guardian has not seen – show that she was thinking of contacting Expressen and that one of her friends told her she should get money for her story. However, police statements by the friend offer a more innocent explanation: they say these text messages were exchanged several days after the women had made their complaint. They followed an inquiry from a foreign newspaper and were meant jokingly, the friend stated to police.

The Guardian understands that the recent Swedish decision to apply for an international arrest warrant followed a decision by Assange to leave Sweden in late September and not return for a scheduled meeting when he was due to be interviewed by the prosecutor. Assange's supporters have denied this, but Assange himself told friends in London that he was supposed to return to Stockholm for a police interview during the week beginning 11 October, and that he had decided to stay away. Prosecution documents seen by the Guardian record that he was due to be interviewed on 14 October.

The co-ordinator of the WikiLeaks group in Stockholm, who is a close colleague of Assange and who also knows both women, told the Guardian: "This is a normal police investigation. Let the police find out what actually happened. Of course, the enemies of WikiLeaks may try to use this, but it begins with the two women and Julian. It is not the CIA sending a woman in a short skirt."

Assange's lawyers were asked to respond on his behalf to the allegations in the documents seen by the Guardian on Wednesday evening. Tonight they said they were still unable obtain a response from Assange.

Assange's solicitor, Mark Stephens, said: "The allegations of the complainants are not credible and were dismissed by the senior Stockholm prosecutor as not worthy of further investigation." He said Miss A had sent two Twitter messages that appeared to undermine her account in the police statement.

Assange's defence team had so far been provided by prosecutors with only incomplete evidence, he said. "There are many more text and SMS messages from and to the complainants which have been shown by the assistant prosecutor to the Swedish defence lawyer, Bjorn Hurtig, which suggest motivations of malice and money in going to the police and to Espressen and raise the issue of political motivation behind the presentation of these complaints. He [Hurtig] has been precluded from making notes or copying them.

"We understand that both complainants admit to having initiated consensual sexual relations with Mr Assange. They do not complain of any physical injury. The first complainant did not make a complaint for six days (in which she hosted the respondent in her flat [actually her bed] and spoke in the warmest terms about him to her friends) until she discovered he had spent the night with the other complainant.

"The second complainant, too, failed to complain for several days until she found out about the first complainant: she claimed that after several acts of consensual sexual intercourse, she fell half asleep and thinks that he ejaculated without using a condom – a possibility about which she says they joked afterwards.

"Both complainants say they did not report him to the police for prosecution but only to require him to have an STD test. However, his Swedish lawyer has been shown evidence of their text messages which indicate that they were concerned to obtain money by going to a tabloid newspaper and were motivated by other matters including a desire for revenge."
Post Sat Dec 18, 2010 5:22 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
IAmNiki



Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 1605
Location: North Smithfield, RI
 Reply with quote  

article posted wrote:

The Guardian understands that the recent Swedish decision to apply for an international arrest warrant followed a decision by Assange to leave Sweden in late September and not return for a scheduled meeting when he was due to be interviewed by the prosecutor. Assange's supporters have denied this, but Assange himself told friends in London that he was supposed to return to Stockholm for a police interview during the week beginning 11 October, and that he had decided to stay away. Prosecution documents seen by the Guardian record that he was due to be interviewed on 14 October.



Wouldn't that be considered 'fleeing?' Would that warrant INTERPOL involvement?
Post Sat Dec 18, 2010 5:52 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Plum Puddin'



Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 1793
Location: Snagglepussy.
 Reply with quote  

Do rape victim's usually tweet that they want to take their rapist to a 'cray fish' party the day after said rape?

Maybe they do.
Post Sat Dec 18, 2010 5:57 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Charlie Foxtrot



Joined: 23 Jan 2008
Posts: 1379
Location: Rochester, NY
 Reply with quote  

IAmNiki wrote:
article posted wrote:

The Guardian understands that the recent Swedish decision to apply for an international arrest warrant followed a decision by Assange to leave Sweden in late September and not return for a scheduled meeting when he was due to be interviewed by the prosecutor. Assange's supporters have denied this, but Assange himself told friends in London that he was supposed to return to Stockholm for a police interview during the week beginning 11 October, and that he had decided to stay away. Prosecution documents seen by the Guardian record that he was due to be interviewed on 14 October.



Wouldn't that be considered 'fleeing?' Would that warrant INTERPOL involvement?


Go to the Interpol website. On the left hand side there's a list of areas of crime they target. Rape isn't one of them. It's not even listed under the "other crimes" section. A red notice for someone leaving the country who is wanted for questioning about a lower grade rape charge (Sweden has different levels of seriousness as far as rape is concerned) is unusual.
Post Sun Dec 19, 2010 6:54 am
 View user's profile Send private message
IAmNiki



Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 1605
Location: North Smithfield, RI
 Reply with quote  

Charlie Foxtrot wrote:
IAmNiki wrote:
article posted wrote:

The Guardian understands that the recent Swedish decision to apply for an international arrest warrant followed a decision by Assange to leave Sweden in late September and not return for a scheduled meeting when he was due to be interviewed by the prosecutor. Assange's supporters have denied this, but Assange himself told friends in London that he was supposed to return to Stockholm for a police interview during the week beginning 11 October, and that he had decided to stay away. Prosecution documents seen by the Guardian record that he was due to be interviewed on 14 October.



Wouldn't that be considered 'fleeing?' Would that warrant INTERPOL involvement?


Go to the Interpol website. On the left hand side there's a list of areas of crime they target. Rape isn't one of them. It's not even listed under the "other crimes" section. A red notice for someone leaving the country who is wanted for questioning about a lower grade rape charge (Sweden has different levels of seriousness as far as rape is concerned) is unusual.


But INTERPOL didn't send out the red notice... Sweden requested it. And INTERPOL said okay. Should INTERPOL have been like "Well this guy is all over the news and we know where he is, but we aren't going to go get him because it's not on the website." If they are being influenced by politics or not, he still RAN and missed a court date with a prosecutor.

Unusual, yes. But I don't think that he is any more innocent (or guilty) just because something unusual happened. Political motivations or not, he still had allegations to face.
Post Sun Dec 19, 2010 8:32 am
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 23, 24, 25, 26, 27  Next
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Mon Jul 28, 2014 8:41 am
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon