Julian Assange To Be Extradited To Sweden 530
An anonymous reader writes "WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has lost his challenge against extradition to Sweden to face allegations of sexual assault. The 39-year-old Australian computer expert, who has infuriated the US government by releasing thousands of secret diplomatic cables on his website, is wanted in relation to claims made by two WikiLeaks volunteers last August."
Did more for Democracy in the Arab World (Score:4, Insightful)
...who has infuriated the US government by releasing thousands of secret diplomatic cables on his website...
Maybe so, but I think he did more for moving the Arab World towards Democracy than the US ever did.
I mean think about this: food prices are going through the roof and people see, thanks to WikiLeaks, that their "leaders" are living high on the hog at their expense. I think they've seen (I hope) that their leaders played them for chumps by blaming the US for all their problems and at the same time, taking billions in foreign "aid" for the US so that the despots can fight against terrorism - our retarded Government actually believed that only the despots could fight against terrorism.
And I think the leaks have shown that some of their "revolutionary leaders" who are "standing up to" the US are nothing but liars and cheats.
If the charges are true, I would expect Assange to pay and if they are made up for whatever reason - government intrigue or for attention whoring - I hope that he is exonerated and the people behind the ruse are exposed and punished.
"The Genie is Out of the Bottle" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why does he fear Sweden will send him to US? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's all about buying time for the United States to attempt to push the SHIELD bill through Congress. Right now, Assange is an Australian Citizen who has committed no crime in the United States or in the United Kingdom or the Commonwealth of Nations. While in Sweden, Assange will be incarcerated or on bail while he awaits and undergoes trial, a process which could take years. This means that Assange will not be able to leave Sweden for a country which does not have an extradition treaty with the United States while undergoing trial in Sweden: see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extradition#Extradition_treaties_or_agreements [wikipedia.org] for a list of them. This would give the United States time either pass the bill, or find *something* they can stick on Assange. (While Assange is no mobster, remember that they got Capone on tax evasion. The powers that be don't always care about *how* you become guilty, just that you are.)
I'm sure they would have preferred to keep him in the UK - they are the provincial spear carrier of the United States, to use Chomsky's words -, but he committed no crime there, and they are trying to make this look as "legal" as possible. The last thing they want to do is make a huge scene over this, or make a martyr out of Assange through "unjust law" (although that still may happen) and spawn copycats. Thus the die down in press on Assange since his first denial of bond; until now of course.
Don't be surprised if the next thing you see on FOX News is Glenn Beck extolling the virtues of the SHIELD Act, while on CNN you have a "balanced debate" about "national security" and the "continuing need" for "tighter safeguards against terrorism".
The fix is in (Score:5, Insightful)
Won't matter. This whole play was written before he even met those women in Sweden.
Re:Why does he fear Sweden will send him to US? (Score:4, Insightful)
Sweden also has strict laws against extralegal renditions to countries that torture prisoners, but that didn't help the guy who found himself in Egypt after getting booked by Happy Fun Fun Charter Tours.
This isn't about 'what is likely' to happen... Sure it's unlikely that Sweden will send him off to the US against local laws, what does matter is that the court must be convinced there is no chance at all it will happen. Not just that it isn't likely for some reason like "he's white, not brown like that other guy". Precedent says Sweden is willing to break the law to appease the US, and this seems like a prime candidate for that happening again.
Also it should be obvious why the UK and Australia would want Sweden to do the rendition, as such an action would cause huge political problems. Better to have little Sweden do the dirty work.
Re:Appeal (Score:3, Insightful)
The UK does not extradite if they believe the person may be executed.
This is what Assange is fighting for, claiming that Sweden will extradite him to the us, where he will be executed. Therefore by proxy, The UK has gone against their policy.
Re:Did more for Democracy in the Arab World (Score:5, Insightful)
Possibly the U.S. government is angry about that, too. They just can't say it aloud.
Re:No US Extradition (Score:3, Insightful)
At least it looks like Assange won't be extradited to the US in connection to any Wikileaks related investigation, as Sweden did not ask the UK court for onward extradition.
Uh, seriously? Once they have him in their hands it's all over. The USA invents some new charges and bingo, extradition.
Re:The fix is in (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Appeal (Score:5, Insightful)
You do know that the US has a similar extradition treaty with the UK? If the US really wanted him they could just go after him in Britain.
After the fiasco of the Enron three being extradited to Texas and charged for crimes done in the UK against a UK bank then sentenced to jail over something that isn't even a crime in the UK, it is not likely to happen again. It is also worth noting that it is a staggeringly unfair, one-way extradition policy set up by a previous government and is likely to be repealed if challenged, especially in another political farce, double-dipped with political corruption like this whole Assange business is.
Re:The fix is in (Score:5, Insightful)
In 50 years, when all the documents are declassified showing the scummy shit going on behind the scenes on this, I'll be sure and send them along.
But for now, you just keep believing it's a coincidence that a guy who hadn't had a single criminal offense in 39 years (aside from some minor hacking stuff) suddenly turned into a rapist a few weeks after embarrassing the most powerful government in the world. You keep believing that it was just chance that two women willing to press charges against him for unrelated crimes both met him within 24 hours of each other. You keep believing that Daniel Domscheit-Berg isn't a plant who's part of a larger effort to discredit Assange by any means necessary, or that these bullshit charges aren't a part of that effort either. You keep believing that some of us didn't see this discrediting campaign coming [slashdot.org] even as Assange was stepping off that plane in Sweden.
Re:Why does he fear Sweden will send him to US? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why does he fear Sweden will send him to US? (Score:4, Insightful)
In addition to the issue with death penalty crimes, Sweden also can't legally turn him over to the US without the UK's approval anyway, under European Union laws (Various extradition rules under the European Arrest Warrant [europa.eu] acts).
FTFY. If Sweden puts him on a flight to the USA then it wouldn't do a whole lot of good if the UK complained about it -- which on current showing they'd be unlikely to do anyway.
Re:The fix is in (Score:4, Insightful)
That doesn't even make sense. The women are accusing him of rape and so far there is zero evidence apart from their word. Of course he is innocent until proven guilty. The women have a well publicised catalogue of making charges, dropping charges, changing charges, spending the days after the alleged 'rape' with the accusers still Twittering about how happy they were to be with him, etc. To an outsider, it sounds like the women are pawns being used by a corrupt Swedish judicary (with police leaking the case to the press plus the Prime Minister trying incite hate against a victim that hasn't even gone to trial yet) on the behest of the US.
Hardly mindless hero worship when backed by a long trail of evidence, albeit some circumstantial, and incredible 'coincidences'.
Phillip.
Re:Why does he fear Sweden will send him to US? (Score:3, Insightful)
The guy deserves to be extradited.
You based this on what, exactly? Something you read in the papers, or have you seen actual "evidence"? For some small reason, I believe it's the former.. can't pin down why though.
Re:No US Extradition (Score:5, Insightful)
You're assuming of course that Sweden will follow the letter of the law.
It's perfectly possible Sweden will just ignore it's obligations and ship him to the US anyway. Why? Because a nice lucrative deal for their corporations in the US will be worth far more to them than a bit of fall out in Europe which will result in perhaps a few bullish exchanges, and then will be quickly forgotten.
That's really all the US has to offer Sweden- something to make it worthwhile for them, and as Sweden is such a small country, it's not too hard to do something that'll make a big impact. A $20bn trade deal might not be enough to sway countries like the UK or Germany into dodging their international obligations, but to Sweden it would've been enough to completely negate their annual economic contraction during the recent financial turmoil and then given them some growth on top.
hey folks you know what? (Score:4, Insightful)
it's just one guy. wikileaks is larger than one man. assange knows this. you should know it to
it's a failure of most people that we get all caught up in the personalities, and forget the principles. it's true of anything political
say the USA lock assange up for the rest of his life. and? will that stop wikileaks? will that stop people from using wikileaks or bringing material to wikileaks? will that stop other wikileaks-like projects?
whatever!
the IDEA matters, the PERSON is irrelevant. assange would be the first to say this to you. they can do anything they want to him, they haven't destroyed his fame, and what made his name, and the idea he started
you can assassinate a man. you can smear his good name. but you can't stop HIS IDEA
THAT'S what is important
one man is brought down, but the cause continues unabated. i'm not afraid, are you afraid? i'm angered, are you angered?
so stop freaking out over the personality, focus on the principles. nothing's changed
Re:The fix is in (Score:4, Insightful)
And that is why there will be a trial.
Really if a woman accused you of rape do you not think that you would be arrested and investigated? Do you not think that if you left the country you would have a warrant issued for your arrest? If Assange was Glen Beck would you say the same thing?
Re:He can still avoid the SHIELD Act (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why does he fear Sweden will send him to US? (Score:3, Insightful)
If the EU citizens really believe the US sucks that bad, then maybe it truly is time for the US to withdraw from Europe, and return to an 1800s-style neutral policy.
Maybe. Or maybe the US could just stop being international thugs, and then maybe EU citizens might stop taking such a jaundiced view of them. Worth a try.
Re:The fix is in (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not surprised that people are left to speculate on what the US might do, because the US has recently and clearly demonstrated itself to be capable of gross and persistent violations of human rights (water boarding is torture) of due process (extraordinary rendition) and of deception, equivocation and spinning like a big old ferris wheel to justify these transgressions.
You can't really blame OP for fearing the worst when it comes to the USA's behaviour in these matters.
Re:Why shouldn't he think that? (Score:4, Insightful)
Sarah Palin, Huckabee, some bloggers, and even some two-bit Congresscritters aren't going to get anyone executed for anything. Look at the record. The last time that the Federal Government executed someone for espionage was the Rosenbergs, in 1953. And the reason it happened was because everyone thought that they gave the Soviets the A-Bomb. Before that, it was not exactly common to execute anyone for treason or espionage related acts either. They might or might not have been wrong about the involvement of the Rosenbergs, but no one could argue that the charges were not incredibly serious. Wikileaks is embarrassing, but its not like handing over weapons of mass destruction to an enemy state.
Unless Assange does something a lot more serious the worst he's likely to get, if legally extradited, is ten years or something in Federal prison. The Obama Administration might not have been everything the libs hoped for, but they're not likely to support the death penalty for someone who resembles a journalist. And he'll have every anti-war and free speech interest group submitting briefs and holding protests the entire time. He's far more likely to be shot by some crazy on the way to the courthouse than executed.
I can accept that elements of the government might be murderous enough to have him killed, but it would have to happen covertly. And that is just as likely to happen in the UK as it is in Sweden. The only good legal reason for Assange to not be sent to Sweden is the fact that they hadn't actually charged him with anything, but that does not appear to have been sufficient grounds to refuse.