Time for Assange to have a sex change, like 'Chelsea' Manning? This nasty little grub is not worth talking about, and he should be handed over to the U.S, the only place he is likely to receive the justice he deserves.

ttbn. If Assange is not worth talking about, why then are you engaging in the conversation about him?
Please explain.
David

Julian is not nor ever was a Journalist!

Just a narcissistic grub, who sought shelter in the Ecuadorian Embassy to avoid going to Sweden and face charges of criminal rape. And without a shadow of any perceivable doubt not the action of an innocent man or anything remotely resembling a man.

My sainted mother, bless her, told me if you want to do something, whatever it may be. only go ahead and do it if you're prepared to wear any and all consequences.

Julian Assange is not a journalist nor a man, given a man would have fronted up to face his accusers.

Moreover, a man would not hack into a government agency's secret files for the sole purpose of notoriety and scandal-seeking sensationalism.

This creature is, I believe, little more than a criminal hacker who has betrayed all moral values, his country and its most trust ally. Yes, there was a case for exposing war crimes, but nothing more!

It is the other massive (criminal hacking) espionage that condemns this evil personified, hedonistic narcissistic criminal hacker/Russian operative and spy? Has no redeeming features nor do those who seek to excuse or apologise for or defend the indefensible.
Alan B.

The two comments above condemning Julian Assange are obviously from people who have never kept an eye on news and views originating from other than the Western mainstream media, which is largely biased towards what major US government departments want believed. Then note that the most scathing informed criticism of dirty things US organisations get up to largely comes from commentators who originally at least come from the US. Also need to remember that prosecutors sometimes try all sorts if dirty tricks when determined to have targeted people convicted for something. Including if evidence is too flimsy to get them for the reason they want to try and set them up for something else.

As there is obvious political interference to try and have Assange convicted of something, hopefully magistrates and judges appointed to hear charges are not selected because "powers that be" think they are most likely to find him guilty. They should resist covert pressures that will almost certainly be applied to find him guilty of something even if evidence is flimsy and dubious

Risible rubbish Mox. Da?
Alan B.

Assange does not seem to be a good person, but that does not mean that he deserves to be trialled by America based on American laws: he is not an American, never been, and whatever he did was not on American soil. Why, should an Australian woman who is arrested in Thailand for a traffic offence be extradited to Saudi Arabia to be charged with marrying against her father's will?