Hi Banjo,

None of your points have relevance to the extradition proceedings. What is in question is whether Mr Shipton has a case to answer and whether his alleged actions would also be considered a crime in the UK. The High Court decided that Mr Shipton does have a case to answer relating to endangering lives by allegedly releasing their identities and by allegedly providing technical assistance in the procurement of classified information. Mr Shipton's appeal raised no further arguments other than an alleged plot to kill him. If his appeal fails he will have every opportunity to defend himself against those allegations in court, something that Mr Shipton has been trying very hard to avoid. I have found his behaviour to be pathetic and cowardly, which is all the worse for his complete lack of empathy for his alleged victims. Rather than express any concern for people who were harmed (something which does dot entail admitting guilt), he has simply denied any culpability, alleged conspiracy against him and claimed that America has no right to put him on trial because Americans have allegedly committed crimes for which they have not faced trial.

Hi Fester,

There are many misconceptions about Assange. The Reporters
Without Borders link exposed some of them. I agree with
Banjo on this issue. The US should be tried first before
Assange. Hopefully, the UK court will agree. Under UK law
Assange did not commit a crime. Exposing state crimes is
not against the law

Assange has been indicted for receiving, possessing,
and communicating information to the public of
evidence of war crimes committed by the US government.
Reporting a crime is not a crime.

Military sources and US investigators have not found any
evidence that Assange colluded with US Army Intelligence
Analyst Manning to hack into a Pentagon computer.

Assange acted as a journalist to expose US military
wrong doing and he is protected under press freedom
guaranteed by the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Hi Foxy,

"Military sources and US investigators have not found any
evidence that Assange colluded with US Army Intelligence
Analyst Manning to hack into a Pentagon computer."

Well, the indictment against Mr Shipton says otherwise.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1153486/download

You are simply repeating the unsupported claims of Mr Shipton's gullible supporters. If there is so much evidence to support his innocence he should not fear defending himself in court.

Hi Fester,

Why do you keep referring to Julian Assange as Shipton?

John Shipton was Assange's biological father but he
separated from Assange's mother before Assange was
born. When Assange was 1 year old his mother married
Brett Assange whom Assange regards as his father.

I have been providing information from reputable sources.
I have no control over what you choose to believe.

Hi Foxy,

Brett didn't hang around for long and his biological dad is still calling for his release. Maybe he just liked the name? I think he does it because he's a ponce as well as a narcissist.

I have sympathy for Chelsea Manning and think that her sentence was in no small part because of Mr Shipton's actions. Mr Shipton's release of unredacted documents was probably after he discovered that Manning had given information to press agencies and did not want to be beaten to the punch by them. That action was reckless, selfish, and showed a complete disregard for the people he endangered. If those journalists he met in Spain were to testify it would be damning for his defence I'd imagine.

That the judgement of Mr Shipton's request to appeal his extradition is being reserved demonstrates how fair the British courts are. Nothing like Russian courts.