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."
Re:The fix is in (Score:5, Interesting)
So those women are guilty until proven innocent? Assange is innocent until proven guilty at least under US law but this seems like mindless hero worship at this point.
Let justice be served (Score:2, Interesting)
What if Assange actually committed the crimes he's been accused for, shouldn't he face the consequences?
I've got a cousin who is a journalist and met Assange during his time here in Sweden at a party.
My cousin and his colleagues noted that he had a sleazy approach to women. This was before the accusations.
Not saying that he is guilty, just saying that I'm not surprised of the accusations and don't think that Assange should be handled in any other way than you and me.
Re:Why does he fear Sweden will send him to US? (Score:4, Interesting)
However the safest place for Assange to resist extradition is the country where he is a citizen, especially as there is a political divide in government about whether wikileaks is a good or bad thing. The underdog, the battler http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aussie_battler [wikipedia.org] is very big in Australian culture and Julian versus the whole US government would be extremely popular, especially after http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hew_Raymond_Griffiths [wikipedia.org] and that took more than three years without much public sympathy (and not after being lied into a war in Iraq), something which those diplomatic would have likely exposed.
Re:No US Extradition (Score:3, Interesting)
The U.S. wants him in prison. It serves their purposes even better if it's on rape charges (because those charges discredit him and tarnish his martyr status too). They don't just want him just taken out, they want him discredited. That's why they've been stirring up dissent among his former supporters too (some of whom [wikipedia.org] were likely plants sent in for this very purpose).
After all, why make him a martyr by dragging him to the U.S. and charging him with dubious espionage charges when you can send him to prison as a rapist, with many of his "supporters" bad-mouthing him at the same time?
It's a smart move on the CIA's part. I'm actually surprised, as they have a very long history [amazon.com] of fucking up these kinds of operations. Wouldn't surprise me to find out this wasn't their work, but some other U.S. agency (with some goddamn common sense).
Re:The fix is in (Score:3, Interesting)
No, it wasn't a chance. Fame tends to both make people stupid and attract parasitic people. Assange got a lot of fame, very quick, and it's both made him stupid and the target of opportunists. I don't see any reason to believe the US government is involved. Why should they? The best way they can discredit wikileaks is by letting Assange continue to self-destruct.
I support the concept of wikileaks. I hope they survive their arrogant twit of a spokesman.
Re:On what charges? (Score:5, Interesting)
I was under the impression that Sweden gave him permission to leave the country. How could he skip town if they let him leave?
Re:He can still avoid the SHIELD Act (Score:4, Interesting)
Incorrect. There were several exemptions made to ex post facto laws, even ones which led to eventual punishment, all on different grounds, and its hard to imagine "national security" couldn't be one of them:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law#United_States [wikipedia.org]
Re:The fix is in (Score:2, Interesting)
You forgot to mention that one of the women pressing charges left right after making the accusation for an extended stay in Israel. Not the traditional resting place for Swedish women, but outed CIA spies.
Re:The fix is in (Score:2, Interesting)
" a coincidence that a guy who hadn't had a single criminal offense in 39 years (aside from some minor hacking stuff) " So he's the guy who didn't have a single criminal offense except for the criminal offenses. Sounds like the same logic his defense used.
Re:Appeal (Score:5, Interesting)
It doesn't matter whether Assange thinks he might be victimized by the USA or not.
What matters is that significant voices in USA politics have been publicly calling for the USA government to go after Assange. His lawyers have introduced that as evidence. The British court system has to accept that evidence or reject it on some evidentiary basis; it cannot be rejected because it sounds too far-fetched to be true.
I think the action of this lower court is appropriate. Since it knows that Assange has the means and the desire to appeal, it has taken this route to kick a thorny set of legal questions up the stairs, where a court with more appropriate authority can rule on the amount of risk that McCain, Palin, Beck, Limbaugh and others represent to Assange's rights under British law.
The same applies to whether the arguments that: 1) he should not be extradited before he is charged with a crime, and 2) that he should not be extradited for behavior that is not recognized as criminal in any EU country other than Sweden. These are all heady matters that deserve the attention of a higher court, and the appropriate way to make that happen is through appeal.