UN rules in favour of Assange

[Snowhobbit]

You mean I should link to one of the British, state-obeying falsepapers that omit the Swedish government changing the prosecutor two times until they found one who is ready to pretend a crime actually happened?

This may surprise you but your second paragraph has nothing to do with what I quoted.

As for credible sources, show me one that is as detailed about the events as the one I linked but disagrees about the prosecutor being changed several times. Then we can talk about which one is more credible and I might even agree with you. Just derailing my source based on sources that give a very superficial overview of the events (or just your word) is hardly helpful.

Why don't we discuss abortion using a website like Abortion is murder? Or maybe right-wing ideologies based on Northfront or whatever that crap is called? How about a gun debate based on NRA alone? Or maybe lets discuss Brexit using only European Union websites?

[Husar]

Why don't we discuss abortion using a website like Abortion is murder? Or maybe right-wing ideologies based on Northfront or whatever that crap is called? How about a gun debate based on NRA alone? Or maybe lets discuss Brexit using only European Union websites?

So you have nothing?

[Snowhobbit]

So you have nothing?

I believe I provided multiple quotes from cites not named "assangeisarapist.com" or equivalent. Did you skip the classes on critiquing your own sources in school?

[Husar]

I believe I provided multiple quotes from cites not named "assangeisarapist.com" or equivalent. Did you skip the classes on critiquing your own sources in school?

How many of them explained why the rape charges were at first discarded by a prosecutor or two for being irrelevant and then picked up again by another?

[Snowhobbit]

How many of them explained why the rape charges were at first discarded by a prosecutor or two for being irrelevant and then picked up again by another?

For that you are free to read the statements by the prosecutor. To put it simply, either new evidence was presented, or the evidence present was interpreted as likely to result in a conviction. Or you can of course believe that the US government decides how the Swedish prosecution works. Of course that puts you in the same class of people as those who believe "The Jews" rule the world and are out to eradicate the Aryan race.

[Gaius Sempronius Gracchus]

For that you are free to read the statements by the prosecutor. To put it simply, either new evidence was presented, or the evidence present was interpreted as likely to result in a conviction. Or you can of course believe that the US government decides how the Swedish prosecution works. Of course that puts you in the same class of people as those who believe "The Jews" rule the world and are out to eradicate the Aryan race.

So...you have nothing then (given that the best you can come up with is an either/or possibility for what the prosecutor might have said - so no actual evidence of what the prosecutor has said, or that such statements are available)...except the usual (illogical) ad-hominem hyperbole and misplaced hubris.

[Snowhobbit]

So...you have nothing then (given that the best you can come up with is an either/or possibility for what the prosecutor might have said - so no actual evidence of what the prosecutor has said, or that such statements are available)...except the usual (illogical) ad-hominem hyperbole and misplaced hubris.

Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence. I'm not the one claiming we are being ruled from the Lizard people on the moon.