Assange.

The Guardian 20111 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.

2 – Assange apparently fiddled with some Swedish girls and they reported him to the Police. Sweden – Nice country, sensible people, expemplery justice system, no more threat of extradition to US in Sweden than UK.
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..

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 : “WikiLeaks is designed to make capitalism more free and ethical.”

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.

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?

Scenerio A: The Swedish justice system (like ours) prioritise cases where they feel a conviction is more likely, so if there is some doubt in the prosecutors mind over this case it does not become high priority. The alleged victim is not happy about this so complains to her MP, her MP then raises this issue…this is what they are for, amongst other things.
Scenerio B: An MP wants to raise his profile so seizes upon this case which otherwise may have been dropped and raises the issue… This is the nature of beast sometimes.
Scenario C: A Swedish MP is really in the pay of the CIA or State Dept of USA and raises the issue…

The Swedish prosecutors may well think the case is marginal and don’t want to draw too much attention to something they don’t feel they can secure a conviction on and therefore drag their heels over it…

@ ernie lynch – I said a “modern” Che Guevara, clearly if the great Che was still alive he would have seen that Capitalisim is the one true path and worshiped the great god that is “Merchandise” and attended the Church of the Holy Brand. Boy am i glad that didn’t happen after he died… 😉

The Swedish prosecutors may well think the case is marginal and don’t want to draw too much attention to something they don’t feel they can secure a conviction on and therefore drag their heels over it…

or

The Swedish prosecutors may well think the case is marginal political and don’t want to draw too much attention to something they don’t feel they can secure a conviction on be seen as America’s poodle the Britain sometimes is and therefore drag their heels over it and hoping it all goes away or someone else does the American dirty work for them…

the russians wouldve polloniumed his ass some time ago

the russians wouldve polloniumed his ass some time ago

*Decides against suhsi for lunch*

I heard that if you’re wanted for normal crimes ( like rape) then you can’t claim political asylum.

If it was me, I’d want to clear my name of any crime, the running about makes him look guilty, especially in someone who’s all about getting information into public.

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

There is no human right that allows you to avoid trial for sexual assault in one of the worlds most liberal democracies. Perhaps you think there should be. Please enlighten us all on your views.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18521881
BBC’s ‘Assange FAQ’.

I actually think the biggest nail in his credibility would be for him to be extradited to Sweden then the Americans to do nothing. He’d just look like a tin-foil hat wearing loon for the things he’d done.

The real damage to wikileaks came when the story became Assange not the stuff they were revealing. Putting him on trial in the US for the wikileaks stuff would be just bringing attention to him. If the Americans are pulling the strings as some have suggested, the smartest course of action would be to make sure he went to jail in Sweden.

*Decides against suhsi for lunch*

polloniumed his ass not Bass, cap’n

Any chance of sweden writing a “promise we won’t give you to the americans, cross our heart and hope to die, no take backs, our fingers aren’t crossed, we really really promise” contract so they can get him back to interview and if need be prosecute him?

He’s accused of some pretty nasty stuff but he seems to have an entire nation wanting him to be hunted down and illegally shot (or extradited, tried and put to death) who wouldn’t be just a little worried

and paranoid

Latest news on the Beeb- if Ecuador grant him asylum the UK Government will NOT guarantee his safe passage.

So, has he actually been charged with a crime? Since when do you get extradited over something you’ve not been charged with?

You mean like the assurances the UK sought from Jordan over Abu Qatada?

There is no human right that allows you to avoid trial for sexual assault in one of the worlds most liberal democracies.

Yet the whole case for the alleged rape is that he persuaded her to have sex by not being completely honest about his long term intentions, not that he forced her, Sweden seems to be the only country where this is classified as rape. She was perfectly fine with what took place until she discovered there was also another women.

Its easy to be persuaded by the “rape” headline, what we would normally consider to be rape is a nasty horrible crime and quite rightly despised, but that is not what happened here.

There is no human right that allows you to avoid trial for sexual assault

There haven’t been any charges laid against him, I believe he’s agreed to be interviewed but doesn’t want to be extradited.

As I said earlier.. they throw all this at someone until it sticks… moving the conversation from the real issue (freedom of information / unprofessional diplomatic corp) to a possibly minor but more sensational offense (the investigation is for a charge that is less serious than a ‘rape’ charge).

I’m not trying to defend him (assault of any kind is abhorent), I’m trying to show how we are being manipulated and how people who challenge the status quo are brought down.

Well he is kind of creepy

well he must be guilty then.

So.. He’s an Australian citizen, who allegedly committed crimes against USA and Sweden, hiding in the Ecuadorian Embassy.

Time to make it somebody else’s problem.

So he’ll just be sleeping on the floor of the embasy for the next few years?

The one thing we can all learn from this; never sleep with a Swede (not sure if it also applies to male’s?), no matter how hot. Unless you are happy to risk a ‘rape’ charge when she finds out you also slept with her friend…

Yet the whole case for the alleged rape is that he persuaded her to have sex by not being completely honest about his long term intentions, not that he forced her, Sweden seems to be the only country where this is classified as rape. She was perfectly fine with what took place until she discovered there was also another women.
Its easy to be persuaded by the “rape” headline, what we would normally consider to be rape is a nasty horrible crime and quite rightly despised, but that is not what happened here.

Thought that deserved re posting, as some people here seem to view him as a bloke who forced himself on some poor defenceless woman. The real story seems to be somewhat different from the Headlines suggestion of it.

Or don’t let your nation become a vassel of the USA’s ‘justice’ system.

The one thing we can all learn from this; never sleep with a Swede (not sure if it also applies to male’s?), no matter how hot. Unless you are happy to risk a ‘rape’ charge when she finds out you also spelt with her friend…

…unless you can run very, very fast.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/usain-bolt-parties-with-three-of-the-swedish-1230004

Yet the whole case for the alleged rape is that he persuaded her to have sex by not being completely honest about his long term intentions, not that he forced her,

Really? I thought it was about the fact that she’d consented to (protected)sex, but he’d taken off the condom for a bareback ride without telling her, then when she found out he refused to undergo an STD tes, and she went to the police.

Yet the whole case for the alleged rape is that he persuaded her to have sex by not being completely honest about his long term intentions, not that he forced her, Sweden seems to be the only country where this is classified as rape. She was perfectly fine with what took place until she discovered there was also another women.

Its easy to be persuaded by the “rape” headline, what we would normally consider to be rape is a nasty horrible crime and quite rightly despised, but that is not what happened here.

Yup, not only would it not be considered rape here, it wouldn’t even be any kind of crime. It might be fairly morally dubious, but there are far worse things you could do in terms of ‘tricking’ people to sleep with you and it still wouldn’t be a crime in most countries.

can’t the Swedes try his case in absentia ?

Supposedly bright enough to get into uni of choice undermine the foreing policies and be a security risk too many ‘Western democracies’[/u] but too bloody stupid to use contraception?

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/a-level-results-urine-boiled-content

scaredypants – Member
can’t the Swedes try his case in absentia ?

He would need to be charged first, the arrest warrant is for questioning.

He would need to be charged first, the arrest warrant is for questioning.

yeh, but what’s to stop them proceeding ? (other than, possibly, lack of substantial evidence)
Do they have to have hime present at a trial ?

(I’m assuming that he could agree to be questioned and then “no comment” everything anyway, so common sense should easily dismiss a request for extradition for questioning as it might well prove totally fruitless)

Wanted for an interview? Don’t they have phones in Sweden?

The Ecuadorian embassy is effectively Ecuadorian soil. If we had good reason to go in, we could do this under our legal system. However, this is an accusation made by one foreign state against another foreign state. Why are we getting involved at all. Why not let the Swedes and the Ecuadorians sort it out between themselves?

Removing an embassy’s immunity on the say so of another country sets a very dangerous precedent in my view.

Why are we getting involved at all. Why not let the Swedes and the Ecuadorians sort it out between themselves?

We’ve issued an arrest warrant for breaking the bail conditions of his extradition appeal case. We ankle-tagged him and told him to stay away from foreign embassies (reside in norfolk).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_The_Swedish_Prosecution_Authority#Complaints_and_initial_investigation
Wikipedia’s detail on the charges and legal processes. There appears to be a language barrier in exactly translating the charges into English. But note:

The High Court found that the Swedish process has reached the stage of criminal proceedings, which would be equivalent to having been charged under English process

Oooh, a wikipedia quote!

Now all we need is a graph or two….

i reckon wallander would get to the bottom of this,