[Closed] Assange.

Well he is kind of creepy. I thought he was Australian anyway, why isn't he taking shelter in their High Commission ??

If the risk of US extradition is so high, why haven't the US asked us to put him on a plane to them?

He's accused of raping two women in Sweden. Sickening.

Why didn't the Swedish take up the Ecudorian's invitation to interview him in their embassy?

Nice to see that we live in a country that values human rights.....

I'm sure that will go down well with Wpc Fletchers family

What are you on about?

I assume this is a reference to teh UK Governments willingness to go in and grab Assange whilst previously being unwillingly to trample on diplomatic property despite there being a perhaps more valid reason.

Still - I bet the US weren't pushing us before.

Lifer - Member
Why didn't the Swedish take up the Ecudorian's invitation to interview him in their embassy?

He's wanted for a serious sexual assault. Why the hell should the Swede's jump to his tune? Strange choice of hero you have.

The legislation was rushed through after Fletcher's murder. It was said on Today that it would be unlikely to work in this context.

Isn't there something dodgy about the Swedish accusations? Prob paid by CIA or something?

druid what are you referring to?

Why didn't the Swedish take up the Ecudorian's invitation to interview him in their embassy?

Because the whole thing has become a ridiculous political soap opera where no one involved will apply common sense because they have some paranoid belief that they will lose face in the eyes of the world.

Isn't there something dodgy about the Swedish accusations? Prob paid by CIA or something?

<Slams head to desk>

He's wanted for rape in a country with an exemplary legal system and human rights record. It's not like we want to extradite him to somewhere with neither of those things like Equador.

He's wanted for a serious sexual assault. Why the hell should the Swede's jump to his tune? Strange choice of hero you have.

The swedes haven't even brought charges against him, all they claim they want to do is interview him again. But it is all really about is discrediting wikileaks, and it has worked on some.

Assange fears that the Swedish case is merely a pretext for his extradition from Sweden to the USA. In his position, and knowing what passes for 'justice' in the YewEssAy, I'd be seeking asylum.

mcboo - Member

"Lifer - Member
Why didn't the Swedish take up the Ecudorian's invitation to interview him in their embassy?"

He's wanted for a serious sexual assault. Why the hell should the Swede's jump to his tune?

Because it would sort it all out?

Strange choice of hero you have.

Bit of a leap of logic there.

Whoever is in charge of dicrediting his image is doing a great job.

He comes accross as consistently guarded and creepy

Plus his name sounds like a minor medical procedure - I had the doctor Assange my wound

when it all kicked off I was 99.9% sure it was a ploy to discredit him.

But the problem now is I see the headlines with his name and rape accusations and then a little bit mentioning wikileaks. Unfortunately the longer it goes on the worse it is getting for him and the people who want to nail him for wikileaks can just sit and wait - he will either give himself up or die of old age hidden away in exile. Hasn't really got a chance.

Now I do not know what to believe.

Seeing the Libyans leave the embassy really f..cked me off. 30 odd years later I still feel the same.

why haven't the US asked us to put him on a plane to them?

Because the potential charges he could face might mean the death penalty and the UK cannot extradite someone in that case.

mcboo - Member

He's wanted for rape in a country with an exemplary legal system and human rights record.

Has he been charged? I thought it was just for questioning.

It's not like we want to extradite him to somewhere with neither of those things like Equador.

[img] [/img]

But the UK could extradite him to Sweden and they in turn are permitted to extradite him to torture central.

I've no idea if he is innocent or not however why isn't the US asking for extradition now based on his leaks?

Keep up Hora.

[quote=hora ]I've no idea if he is innocent or not however why isn't the US asking for extradition now based on his leaks?
Because he could face the death penalty for his wikileaks actions and, in theory, the UK won't extradite in those circumstances.

That would be too obvious and lead to him becoming a martyr. Far better to create a spurious sexual iinuendo that will dissapear the moment he is in swedish custody, but as they have him, the sealed warrant from the USA would then be opened and the extradition sought.

I wonder if Assange is actually still in the London embassy. Under diplomatic convention he could either be hustled out of there in a 'white' package, immune form search or seizure, or made an ecuadorian national, promoted to the diplomatic service, and with his newly-aquired diplomatic immunity, get on the plane out.

Sweden has some of the toughest laws on sexual assault in the EU.

IMHO the fact he's wanted for questioning in regards to the accusations is purely to discredit him. The accused evidence against him is questionable, at best...

Releasing the cables AND subsequently being accused of 'rape' shortly after (in a country with tough laws on it) is no coincidence...

ohnohesback - interesting idea about becoming diplomatically immune and walking out...

hels - Member

Well he is kind of creepy.

I'm surprised the police haven't stormed the Ecuadorian embassy already.

How long is someone allowed to get away with being creepy ffs?

But the UK could extradite him to Sweden and they in turn are permitted to extradite him to torture central.

In Sweden he faces no increased danger of extradition to the US, but he does face the possibility of sexual assault charges.

(And if he actually went to Ecuador, how long before a bunch of hard guys in bomber jackets have him back in the US via a burlap sack and a speed boat?)

Ernie - did I forget to add Australian to that ? These kind of outrages can't be allowed to continue...

If he wasn't such a high profile media character I imagine he might have had an accident by now.

We're not to good at keping our own nationals safe from 'extroadinary rendition'...

We're not to good at keping our own nationals safe from 'extroadinary rendition'...

In fairness if you accidentaly attend an extreamist lecture, then accidentaly get on a plane to Karbul to a friends wedding, then accidentaly pick up an AK-47 and RPG and start shooting at people then it's quite concievable that the Ammericans accidentaly mistook you for a sack of potatoes and sent you to Cuba.

I wonder if Assange is actually still in the London embassy. Under diplomatic convention he could either be hustled out of there in a 'white' package, immune form search or seizure, or made an ecuadorian national, promoted to the diplomatic service, and with his newly-aquired diplomatic immunity, get on the plane out.

Diplomatic immunity can be revoked and would be for such a transparent attempt disobeying a host nation's rule of law.

All the UK govt has done is remind the Ecudaorian govmt/embassy that their own diplomatic immnuity can also be revoked to enable them to carry out the rule of law.

While the protection conferred by dimplomatic immunity is a matter of convention*, the status of diplomatic immunity is almost certainly in the gift of the host nation.

*EDIT: reinforced in law in 1961 apparently.

klumpy - Member

"But the UK could extradite him to Sweden and they in turn are permitted to extradite him to torture central."

Not without the permission of the country he was first exradited from. And Sweden won't get that permission because it would be unlawful for the UK to give it, because the UK doesn't allow extradition in cases where the death penalty applies.

First time I've heard that, do you have a link?

If that's the case then there is no reason for him not to go.

mcboo - Member

He's wanted for rape in a country with an exemplary legal system and human rights record. It's not like we want to extradite him to somewhere with neither of those things like Equador.

It would indeed be dreadful if he was judged before being tried, eh?

mcboo - Member
He's accused of raping two women in Sweden. Sickening.

🙄

The accusations in the warrant relate to 1 woman only and, from what I can see, aren't rape. This was after the first warrant was dropped and the case taken on by another prosecutor.

Of course we can't know now, and probably never will, but it would not surprise me if this was another Lockerbie.

It is worth remembering that despite the headlines currently, it was widely suspected at the start of this farce, just after the Wikileaks expose, that the charges in Sweden were suspected to come from the CIA...

Sadly this part appears to have been lost even from the Australian headlines.

Diplomatic immunity can be revoked and would be for such a transparent attempt disobeying a host nation's rule of law.

And presumably the UK would be relaxed if diplomatic immunity was revoked by a host nation such as Iran ? Rule of law to Iran means Sharia law. Your principle sounds like a recipe for international tension and conflict.

it was widely suspected at the start of this farce, just after the Wikileaks expose, that the charges in Sweden were suspected to come from the CIA...

Really? Anyway, that's beside the point. He's deffo a bit creepy and should be done under any law possible on those grounds alone. And, as hels reminds us, he's also Australian.

First time I've heard that, do you have a link?

If that's the case then there is no reason for him not to go.

think it's a bit more complex....

[i]Sweden is bound by different extradition agreements. It is not meant to grant onwards extradition to a third country without agreement from the extraditing country. But at the same level of the legal hierarchy there is a bilateral treaty between the US and Sweden that allows for extradition without consent from the UK or minimum tests. This is the temporary surrender/conditional release regime - automatic extradition on a loan basis. It is highly likely that the United States will soon request Julian Assange’s extradition from Sweden and this mechanism will be used while Julian Assange is in Swedish custody.[/i]

My understanding is this

1. He slept with two women and there is some question about consent
2. Sweden has very tough laws on such matter (I've read that Swedish men joke about the need to sign a contract before even approaching a woman)
3. There was originally no indication of any charge being laid until a MP decided to push for it (Indicating that the extradition was politaclly motivated)
4. The Swedish police have only indicated that they want to interview Assange (Common sense says that they could do this any where and there is no need to extradite him) I believe Assagne has stated he is happy to be interviewed but did not want to be extradited for fear of then being extradited to the US

I don't necessarily agree with all of Wiki-leaks practices and Assange is easy to paint as a creep.

<rant>

But I am appalled that

1. wiki leaks has been effectively closed down by denying funding (Basically all the banks/credit card companys have been pressured to close their accounts)

2. Assange has been dragged through the mud on politically motivated charges and not one initiated by the Justice system

This and the recent attempt to extradite Paul Watson (Captain of Sea shepherd) to Costa Rica on charges that were dismissed 10 years ago send out a simple message...

..If you challenge the political powers that be - even if you don't break the law - they will throw stuff at you until some of it sticks and brings you down.

That is a very sad statement on the state of our global society

</rant>

[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jan/19/wikileaks-white-house-state-department ]The Guardian 2011[/url]1 Wikileaks peed off the USA in embarrasing its Diplomats and details of some security forces around the world - 3 years on no-one cares..

The damage caused by the WikiLeaks controversy has caused little real and lasting damage to American diplomacy, senior state department officials have concluded.

It emerged in private briefings to Congress by top diplomats that the fallout from the release of thousands of private diplomatic cables from all over the globe has not been especially bad.

This is in direct opposition to the official stance of the White House and the US government which has been vocal in condemning the whistle-blowing organisation and seeking to bring its founder, Julian Assange, to trial in the US.

IMO: He's guilty (possible) or is paranoid or has over reached himself and now wants to hideaway from being a very naughty boy...or has a huge ego and thinks he is somekind of modern Che Guvara take your pick..

Then why is the extradition being pushed by a Swedish MP? and why don't they interview him where ever he is and press charges?

so are we going to war with ecuador now?

and thinks he is somekind of modern Che Guvara

Really ? I had him down as more of a right-wing libertarian, and not so much of a marxist-lenninst.

Quote : [i]"WikiLeaks is designed to make capitalism more free and ethical."[/i]

Which doesn't quite sound like the sort of thing which Comandante Che would have said.

On 30 November 2010, former Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin called for Assange to be "hunted down like Bin Laden".
Current and former U.S. government officials have accused Assange of terrorism. When asked if he saw Assange more as a high-tech terrorist or as a whistleblower, like those who released the Pentagon papers in the 1970s, U.S. Vice President Joe Biden said: "I would argue it is closer to being a high-tech terrorist than the Pentagon papers." In May 2010, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell had used the phrase, calling Assange "a high-tech terrorist", and saying "he has done enormous damage to our country. I think he needs to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law". Also in May 2010, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said: "Information terrorism, which leads to people getting killed, is terrorism, and Julian Assange is engaged in terrorism. He should be treated as an enemy combatant."

On 1 December 2010, Republican Michael Huckabee called for those behind the leak of the cables to be executed, a view partly supported by Kathleen McFarland, former Pentagon advisor under Nixon, Ford and Reagan and current Fox News national security expert.
On 6 December 2010, during a segment of the Fox Business show Follow The Money, Fox News political commentator and analyst Bob Beckel stated, "A dead man can't leak stuff. This guy's a traitor, he's treasonous, and he has broken every law of the United States. [...] And I'm not for the death penalty, so [...] there's only one way to do it: illegally shoot the son of a bitch." Other guests on the program agreed.

On 29 November 2010, Rep. Peter King, Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) wrote to Attorney General Eric Holder, asking that Assange should be prosecuted under the Espionage Act of 1917, and that he should be declared a terrorist. The same day, Rep. King also wrote to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, requesting that she designate Wikileaks as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO).
"I am calling on the attorney general and supporting his efforts to fully prosecute Wikileaks and its founder for violating the Espionage Act. And I’m also calling on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to declare Wikileaks a foreign terrorist organization," King said on WNIS radio on Sunday evening
"By doing that, we will be able to seize their funds and go after anyone who provides them help or contributions or assistance whatsoever,” he said. “To me, they are a clear and present danger to America."
On 30 November 2010, on Fox News, Rep. King repeated his assertions that Wikileaks was a terrorist organization;[190] he continued to repeat these assertions on other news media channels for the following week.
On 2 December 2010, Senator Feinstein and Senator Kit Bond, (respectively, the) Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), sent a joint-letter to Attorney General Holder, asking him to prosecute Mr. Assange under the Espionage Act [18 U.S.C. 793(e)], offering to "close those gaps in the law" if the DOJ found it difficult to apply the law to Mr. Assange's case. In televised interviews Senators Bond and Feinstein stated that:
"We believe that Mr. Assange's conduct is espionage and that his actions fall under the elements of this section of law....Therefore, we urge that he be prosecuted under the Espionage Act."
On 7 December 2010, Senator Dianne Feinstein published an editorial commentary on Assange entitled "Prosecute Assange Under the Espionage Act".
Punishments under the Espionage Act can include the death penalty.