Spain's Judge Garzon Says U.S. Secretly Working to Have Wikileaks Founder Tried There

[sabrina 1]

21. Like so many assumptions, your assumptions here are wrong also.

I am very familiar with the history of the GJ provisions. You make way too many assumptions, which is why I have a lot of problems with your comments many times. This is a perfect example. You deduct from my questioning of the GJ in this case that I know nothing about the purpose of the GJ.

My questioning of this GJ has nothing to do with the premise but with the abuse of that premise which would not be first time there have been questions about how GJs are used by Prosecutors. I suppose I could accuse you of knowing nothing about the controversies and questions about some Prosecutors' use of GJs but then I have no idea what you know or do not know so that would be an assumption.

I asked what is the crime that is presented to this GJ. If they are waiting for Manning to provide them with a crime, then that means they have no crime, doesn't it?

And again, no one has ever claimed that a journalist cannot commit a crime, everyone, including prosecutors and lawyers and even members of GJs can commit crimes.

Judith Miller is not the topic of this conversation. We know what she did. We do not know what Assange is supposed to have done.

And the fact that Sweden still has not filed charges in that case, and have refused to interview him once again, doesn't make any of those politically persecuting him look good and definitely raises questions among fair-minded people without an agenda.

If he has committed a crime, two years appears to be a reasonable amount of time to let the world know what that crime is.

We're still waiting. And we're wondering why Sweden refuses to interview him and have failed to file any charges. If you think this is justice, then we are miles apart on what constitutes justice.