Ecuador To Grant Assange Political Asylum 432
NSN A392-99-964-5927 writes with news that Ecaudor will grant Julian Assange's request for political asylum. An Ecuador official told The Guardian that the country's president, who earlier indicated his decision would arrive after the Olympic Games, will approve the request Assange made in June.
"Government sources in Quito confirmed that despite the outstanding legal issues Correa would grant Assange asylum – a move which would annoy Britain, the US and Sweden. They added that the offer was made to Assange several months ago, well before he sought refuge in the embassy, and following confidential negotiations with senior London embassy staff. The official with knowledge of the discussions said the embassy had discussed Assange's asylum request. The British government, however, 'discouraged the idea,' the offical said. The Swedish government was also 'not very collaborative,' the official said. The official added: 'We see Assange's request as a humanitarian issue. The contact between the Ecuadorean government and WikiLeaks goes back to May 2011, when we became the first country to see the leaked US embassy cables completely declassified ... It is clear that when Julian entered the embassy there was already some sort of deal. We see in his work a parallel with our struggle for national sovereignty and the democratisation of international relations.'"
Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Good for Assange and good for Ecuador.
Re:Good (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Good (Score:5, Interesting)
You're right if he was going to get killed by a professional group it would not be something so obvious as a drone strike.
Agreed. They'd probably start by framing the guy in some kind of sex scandal, as is traditional for the US. Oh wait...
What accusations (Score:5, Informative)
You are aware that in the normal world (any place that is not Sweden) lying to get sex is not actually a crime? If it was, 99% of men would in jail. The remaining 1% are catholic priests and they would be in jail for raping kids.
Assange played two women. That is what ALL this is about. There is NO way this would stand up in any court expect in Sweden and then only because the Americans told them to do something.
Only right wing nutcases pretend the case against Assange has any merit whatsoever.
Oh and the two women involved already knew each other. AND the case had already been dismissed before the Americans got involved.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Quite apart from any supposed CIA attacks, Assange had better make sure he only says nice things about President Correa. From the Human Rights Watch Report [hrw.org]:
Those involved in protests in which there are outbreaks of violence may be prosecuted on inflated and inappropriate terrorism charges. Criminal defamation laws that restrict freedom of expression remain in force and Correa has used them repeatedly against his critics... Impunity for police abuses is widespread... Ecuador’s Criminal Code still has provisions criminalizing desacato (“lack of respect”), under which anyone who offends a government official may receive a prison sentence up to three months and up to two years for offending the president... journalists face prison sentences and crippling damages for this offense... In a draft decree announced in December 2010, domestic NGOs, including those working on human rights, would have to re-register and submit to continuous government monitoring. The decree would give the government broad powers to dissolve groups for “political activism,”
Then again, Assange also said that Sweden was a great place where he felt totally safe, right up until the whole rape thing happened, at which point Sweden was suddenly declared a notorious US lackey...
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Exactly, I was thinking maybe the negotiation was "Ok. we grant you assylum, but you destroy every Ecuador incriminating information you get". I personally do not like much Assange modus operandi (nothing against publishing things with care and not because you care about your personal image), but I will start to respect more Mr. Assange if he dare to publish things about Ecuador even inside the country
Re: (Score:3)
Is that a thinly veiled insinuation that he is mentally deficient? To quote Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"
Re: (Score:2)
No, but assassinating him in Ecuador would pose massive regional problems, and would be blatantly illegal (as would kidnapping him, which again, while not that hard, is not legal).
I'd be more worried about a change in government having a change of mind in Ecuador, and suddenly assange finding himself without a friendly government to protect him.
Re: (Score:3)
as would kidnapping him, which again, while not that hard, is not legal
au contraire! [wikipedia.org]
Re:Good (Score:4, Insightful)
You confuse 'the American public' with 'internet nerds'. The American public is overwhelmingly anti-Wikileaks. [mcclatchydc.com]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You confuse "the American public" with "a handful of people who took some poll".
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
The American public in general is overwhelmingly authoritarian.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
The American public in general is also exceedingly stupid.
Re:Good (Score:4, Insightful)
The American public think the TSA is doing a good job.
Re: (Score:3)
Pro or anti wikileaks has nothing to to with Assange. Many people liked wikileaks before the US Government told everyone it was his personal ego building tool and managed to get the rest of the world to forget about the actual founders and original principals.
FTFY.
Re:Good (Score:4, Insightful)
Armed Robbery: Strike 1 Assault :Strike 2
Steal loaf of bread: Strike 3 and we are fucking done with you. Goodby for the rest of your miserable life.
I see nothing wrong with this.
Right, because every theft of leavened baked goods involves armed criminal action and assault, without exception.
Jackass.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Nothing? Well, that makes you a cruel and evil person. That you can't understand this makes you also a very stupid person. Congratulations. You are a real liability and a net minus to anyone around you.
Re:Good (Score:5, Informative)
source?
http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travel-and-living-abroad/travel-advice-by-country/south-america/ecuador/ [fco.gov.uk]
Express kidnappings are a common crime in Ecuador and are on the increase, particularly in Quito and Guayaquil. Both Ecuadorians and foreign visitors are targets. The kidnappings involve short-term opportunistic abductions aimed at extracting cash from victims who are selected at random. They are held while criminals empty their bank accounts using the victims bank cards. Once the money has been taken the victim is usually released in an isolated area. However, criminals have started to force victims to take them to their homes once they have withdrawn the cash, and violence is becoming more common. This type of crime can involve illegitimate taxis and complicit taxi drivers. In some recent cases in January, March and April 2012, the passengers were pepper sprayed. In 2009 a British tourist was express-kidnapped from a hotel in the north of Quito.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh gee, he quoted from a British Government website. Isn't that special?
Sigh.
http://www.voyage.gc.ca/countries_pays/report_rapport-eng.asp?id=78000 [voyage.gc.ca]
Kidnapping for ransom and express kidnappings, often in connection with carjackings, are of particular concern in Guayaquil. Express kidnappings involve the brief detention of an individual, who is released only after being forced to withdraw funds from an ABM or after arranging for family to pay a ransom. Canadians should exercise caution when using
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If that's truly the case, it would be quite easy to take the spotlight off of him, by allowing him to stand trial for the actual crimes he may have committed (rape and sexual assault) and guarantee that he won't be extradited for non-crimes (journalism). There will certainly be coverage of the trial, but that would be the end of that. Instead, his opponents have made him into a martyr by taking advantage of an unrelated charge and trying overtly to destroy him and his activism with that charge. I personally
Re: (Score:3)
South American non-aligned flexing its muscle.
At least it's not Venezuela, which would be putting him on parade to rub US noses in it.
Re: (Score:3)
Hey, it beats the Singapore exile that Facebook cofounder drew the short straw on.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Well, with all that money, doesn't matter where you are exiled.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
It beats GITMO or some secret CIA prison in the Middle East.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It beats GITMO or some secret CIA prison in the Middle East.
There are no CIA prisons in the Middle East
We have always been at war with EastAsia
Re:Good (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Good (Score:5, Funny)
Gentlemen, i give you, American geography.
Re:Good (Score:5, Informative)
Less than 1 for every 8 Mexicans and less than the number of Asians?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_impact_of_illegal_immigrants_in_the_United_States#Geographic_Origins_of_Undocumented_Immigrants [wikipedia.org]
Something you would know if you checked your data instead of slinging childish ad-hominems.
Re:Good (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Your country is very windy.
of the 56.8% of you that actually notice the whooshing sound, Less than half of them attribute it to completely misunderstanding someone's point.
Of that group, what number actually realise that it is their own lack of understanding and not that of those around them?
Of that group, what percentage can realise their mistake?
For example, there is a good chance that you think that you are super intelligent and that the GP was being serious.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
OK, care to show me the sources that estimate those millions of South Americans crossing the US border every year? Because I did look at the numbers from more than one source, and they were nowhere near those.
Re:Good (Score:5, Funny)
So millions turn into less than 200k? I was wrong, your problems are in basic math, not geography.
Re: (Score:3)
Poliical criminals? Oh no, clearly Assange is a sexual predator and this has nothing to do with politics. It just happened to come out after the whole wiki-leaks scandal embarrassed US politicians. Pure coincidence I say!
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
and one which the US won't miss if an imperial fuckton of bombs happened to vaporize it!
Such statements have no relationship to reality and only serve to make pro-Assenge folks look like perseverating nut-jobs.
It is, however, a great day for Assenge and his cause, and a sad sad day for all those countries that COULD have stood up and made statement to the US and Sweeden.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
"Such statements have no relationship to reality..."
Interesting perspective. I think there is very real evidence to demonstrate that the USA has a habit of bombing other countries and actively overthrowing governments (even elected ones) which refuse to toe the USA line. I wonder how many governments in Central and South America alone have been targeted for "regime change" because the USA didn't like their behavior?
I think the OP has a good point. Ecuador should be watching out for armed rebel groups even if they don't need to be dodging hellfire missiles and smart bombs at the moment.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
South America has gone a long way from the time it was easily manipulated by US. If anything it is getting more hostile to US as time goes, and if US decides to push it too hard it may end losing a lot more than it can possibly win.
Especially with the rise of Brazil as a regional regional economic powerhouse there may be less need to South American countries in general to put up with perceived U.S. bullying.
Re: (Score:3)
2) Old School backed US coups usually involve military action. There was none in Paraguay. It was a dirty move by the congress, but it was done within their laws.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Good (Score:5, Informative)
The US keeps trying, though.
Attempted coup in Ecuador in 2010 and successful coup in Paraguay in June this year.
They usually do this by funding local right wing groups so it's difficult to trace the US origins but most people know how the system works.
Re: (Score:3)
The most ridiculous aspect of it is the fact that Assange is not in, and will not be in, Ecuador. He's in the Ecuadorian embassy. And it's pretty inconceivable how he could possibly get from the embassy to Ecuador.
Diplomatic passport. It would be an extraordinary circumstance, but perfectly workable. The Ecuadorean government would in effect inform the British that Assange was under their protection and therefore should be accorded the same transit and travel rights as other embassy staff.
I'm no expert on international law, but feel free to check whether's there's anything in the Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic Relations [wikipedia.org] that would allow Great Britain to snatch up Assange once he'd been accorded diplomatic status.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
and one which the US won't miss if an imperial fuckton of bombs happened to vaporize it!
Re-read what you just wrote, and ask yourself if you are on the good side or the bad side.
What a turning point in American History (Score:5, Interesting)
A Latin American country is providing safe harbor for a journalist who dared to expose top-secret documents on the military. Someone needs to rework the "In Soviet Russia..." meme for juntas.
Re:What a turning point in American History (Score:5, Funny)
In Ecuador ... asylum seeks you, senor.
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
Re: (Score:3)
My moustache! That's where I left it.
Re:What a turning point in American History (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Wish I had moderator points. THAT was insightful!
Re:What a turning point in American History (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, that's the yarn which has circled in the fanboy echo chamber. Which has essentially no correlation with reality. Do you really think that two separate British courts, including the high court, reviewed the charges against him and confirmed that they met the definition of rape even in the UK, if that was the case?
Here's a brief summary [guardian.co.uk] of what was actually alleged. And here's the court's more detailed fact-finding [judiciary.gov.uk] (you should definitely read the latter). There's nothing "suspicious" about how the case was handled unless you don't actually know how the case was handled (which, of course, has been the main goal of Assange's backers).
To briefly summarize the *actual* accusations, they're that Assange quickly began trying to make out with the first woman, which she initially went along with, only to have him try to force her legs apart and pin her down trying to force sex without a condom, to wherein she consented to sex with a condom to prevent it from happening to her without a condom, only to find out later that the condom was "broken". That night she told a friend about the "violent" (her words) sex with assange, and then moved out of her *own apartment* to get away from him. Concerning the other girl, he had tried to sleep with her without a condom over and over, something which she had never done in her life, even with her previous long-term boyfriend. She kept refusing. He stayed up while she fell asleep, and she woke up to him having sex with her without a condom (if you don't think that having sex with a sleeping person is rape, imho, you're a sick bastard). And yes, she understandably freaked out after it and tried to force him to get an STD test, which he refused.
As for the whole "they didn't decide it was rape until talking together" thing, that's the most offfensive part to me. Do you know how hard it is to admit to even yourself, let alone others, that you were raped? I called mine "an unwanted sexual experience" and whatever other weasel words I could get out of to avoid using that term for myself. It took three months of denial and trying just to move on with my life before I could accept what happened to me. There's a reason most rapes are never reported. You just want to put it in the past and forget about it; the last thing you want to do is have to relive it, to face the person again, to have all sorts of vile allegations leveled against *you*, etc. But if I had found out shortly afterwards that the next day that the guy who attacked me had done the same sort of thing to another girl? I don't know how I would have reacted, but it certainly would have changed the picture.
As for the CPT, they criticize everyone [coe.int]. That's their job. The report on Sweden is no worse than on any other state, and a lot better than a number. And as for giving suspects to the US, Assange felt so comfortable with Sweden that he was *applying for residency* when he was charged with rape. And then fled to the UK from there, which is ten times the US lackey Sweden ever was.
Oh, darn, U.S.! (Score:2)
You almost had him!
Re: (Score:2)
All they have to do is pay a taxi cab driver to kidnap him. No fuss. No muss. He's only made it easier for himself to be nabbed.
Considering that you yourself have thought of such a situation, one would think Assange has already taken such matters into consideration.
I mean, c'mon, if he was dumb enough to have not thought of something so obviously obvious, he'd already be in Gitmo.
To all of you going on about drone strikes (Score:2)
Of course, Ecuador can expect to be brought before some trumped up UN committee and sanctioned for this soon.
And to think... (Score:5, Insightful)
Interesting how quickly things change.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Considering the long history of dictators and military juntas they would be correct. Go to Venezuela and start some demonstrations to speak out against Hugo Chavez and see how much 'freedom' he affords you.
Re:And to think... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:And to think... (Score:5, Insightful)
Great. How does that make Chavez any less of a dictator that jails people for speaking out against him?
Re:And to think... (Score:5, Insightful)
America? Free?
In the US, you are free to:
Work a drudgy job
Pay taxes, deducted weekly from your pay, and levied higher if they think you didn't pay enough over the course of the year.
Pay taxes at the fuel pump
Pay taxes at the grocery store
Pay taxes when you buy alcohol or tobacco
Pay taxes when you somehow manage to buy a luxury item
Pay taxes on your property anually
Pay taxes on your vehicle
Pay levies for public scools
Be assaulted by police, who illegally confiscate any recording devices you have.
Speak publicly and exercise your right to assemble and address grievances in authorised "free speech zones"
Be subjected to brutal beatings if you exercise those rights anywere else
Be subjected to brutal beatings if you exercise those rights in the designated areas, if the message is controvertial or inconvenient
Be innundated in outright lies and yellow journalism 24/7 during election years
Choose which political dick you want up your ass for the next 4, 8, or 10 years (depending on level of govt)
Buy legal immunity if you are wealthy enough
Get totally shafted in the legal system if you aren't
Get enjoined as a spurrious "john doe" in a copyright case with flimsy evidence
Have your internet unplugged through mere allegations.
Get presumed guilty until proven innocent in matters involving copyright via the DMCA
Be arrested for spurrious offences only tangentally related to interstate commerce
Be detained indefinately without evidence or council if even suspected of engaging in terrorism
And so much more!
Just look at all those freedoms! The USA is a GREAT place to live!
Re:And to think... (Score:5, Insightful)
Hello captain obvious.
Paying taxes *is* a requirement for a healthy state. No question. The issue is just what percentage of personal income should be extracted as taxation, before the system becomes onerous. The point of listing so many as to point out that not only does the US have taxes, we just about have taxes for *everything*.
Wanna get married? There's a tax for that!
Inherit property? There's a tax for that too!
Etc.
It isn't that I am opposed to taxes. Far from it. I am opposed to onerous, continually compounding taxes.
This "all or nothing" rhetoric that jumps straight to "move to somalia then!" As an argument is *NOT* acceptable.
Re:And to think... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't *NEED* to point to an alternative, to be justified in lampooning the faults of my own country.
Amusingly, this is exactly why we have first amendment rights in the first place, which is a genuine good thing that many other countries DON'T have.
I don't need to give examples of perfect, candycane and strawberry unicorn spooge gushing utopias in order to point out that there's knee deep bullshit in my back yard. The existence of the bullshit, and that it is in my back yard are self-sufficient in that deterimation.
I don't require a bullshit free back yard to point to, as a source of comparison.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
To begin with, a lot of those entering the US from Mexico and other central American countries were poor, unskilled workers who benefited from the socialist nature of American "capitalism" (things such as the minimum wage, free medical care at any hospital, etc.) which naturally would appeal to
Political refugee (Score:5, Interesting)
Assange is a political refugee, he needs a hide out because a large and a very powerful organisation (and more than one) are after him for disseminating information that those powerful organisations want to keep quiet.
If Assange falls in the hands of American government, he is going to be made an example of, and it's going to be worse than Vietnam for him, sort of like what they did to Bradley Manning but maybe times 10.
Isn't it amazing, 60 years ago people wouldn't have believed if somebody told them, that America could become this....
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Political refugee (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think America is that different then sixty years ago. The difference is that in these days of globalization, Americans aren't limited anymore to input from news sources who are strongly biased. It becomes harder to hide the truth about some things.
If you live in the rest of the world (even western) where you don't have "America #1" or "America the only free country" tagline which for me introduces a lot of ignorance by some Americans, you will rapidly see that America is quite a "normal" country as it has it faults and is certainly not perfect.
For me as European it even have a lot in common in some aspects with Russia or even China, especially in being raised with certain believes tied to nationalism.
False report (Score:5, Informative)
Apparently the story from the Guardian is false.
https://rt.com/news/assange-granted-asylum-ecuador-298/ [rt.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
While there are certainly many mysteries surrounding polish president's death, it was well after Poland joined EU in 2004.
Re: (Score:3)
What's really so mysterious about controlled flight into terrain under bad weather/visibility conditions? It's not like it's the first time that sort of thing happens.
Re: (Score:2)
What's really so mysterious about controlled flight into terrain under bad weather/visibility conditions? It's not like it's the first time that sort of thing happens.
Funny how often CFIT happens when the US Govt. sees [greatdreams.com] fit [speakfreeforum.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Why would the US govt see fit to assassinate the rabidly pro-US Polish leadership?
Re: (Score:3)
US telling Russia "I scratched your back, now you scratch mine"
THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE DUUUUUUDE
Re: (Score:3)
Poland has been one of the more enthusiastic new EU members.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:OK, this is senseless (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:OK, this is senseless (Score:5, Insightful)
And not at all suspicious that we have a known CIA operative - And a close friend of hers - as the women involved here.
That doesn't mean he didn't do it, but when it comes to "benefit of the doubt", he definitely gets it in this case.
Re:OK, this is senseless (Score:5, Informative)
The "covert CIA operative" line is the most "jumped the shark" accusation in this whole fiasco. Do you actually know where that comes from? It's because Ardin once wrote two anti-Castro articles for a magazine Revista de Asignaturas Cubanas, which is put out by a group, Misceláneas de Cuba, which according to some professor, is itself funded by a Swedish organization (unnamed), which is connected with Union Liberal Cubana, which is led by led by Carlos Alberto Montaner, which a Wordpress article says is connected with the CIA. Oh, and she met with a women's right group in Cuba who once had a parade in Florida wherein an accused plane bomber marched next to Maria Carey. Therefore, she's a CIA operative! I kid you not [counterpunch.org].
Can you Assange fans please get back in touch with reality here and step out of the echo chamber for once? Start with the judgement [judiciary.gov.uk].
Re:OK, this is senseless (Score:5, Insightful)
Ecuador is taking a startlingly appropriate and laudable position here, IMHO.
Re: (Score:3)
he was placed under house arrest. Why didn't the US extradite him then? Why would Sweden extradite him before he can stand trial for crimes allegedly committed in Sweden?
Re: (Score:2)
Offering someone asylum doesn't magically transport them out of jail and into Ecuador. Once the Swedish authorities have their hands on him I would imagine that it would be difficult to give him asylum. Even if he is found not guilty of the charges in Sweden they may very well hand him straight to the US without releasing him.
Re: (Score:2)
Let the man stand trial in Sweden and then - pending the outcome - offer him asylum.
Asylum from what, exactly?
Re: (Score:2)
Because anyone in their right mind recognized it was a bogus charge and an obvious setup from the get-go.
Re:OK, this is senseless (Score:5, Insightful)
Sweden assisted the US in extrajudicial rendition and had police turn over two egyptian guys straight to the CIA for transport to torture. The Swedish minister of 'Justice' at the time, Thomas Bodström, who most likely knew about and ok'd the illegal rendition at the time coincidentally runs a law firm together with the representative of the women who brought the allegations.
Not to say that it's a conspiracy, but one can understand why there's a certain reluctance to trust Sweden. It's become a banana republic complicit in torture run by a frat club of criminals.
Re:OK, this is senseless (Score:5, Informative)
This is a trumped up accusation of rape, disclaimed by the victims, dropped by the proscutor, and only reopened under political pressure from the US. He can't expect a fair trial any more than he could expect a fair indictment.
Re: (Score:3)
The whole thing would have been over ages ago if he'd just gone to Sweden to answer the questions. Only the conspiracy nutjobs thinks it was a US plot to execute him. When Ecuador looks like a better democractic country than Sweden then you know someone's been drinking too much of the koolaid.
Re:OK, this is senseless (Score:4, Interesting)
I am not very tin foil hat-ish (Im abig believer is stupidity and selishness being the root of most issues), but even I think he is being setup. Maybe not setup in the traditional sense, but the US is pressuing Sweden to nial him to the cross if they can on any charge they can when the oppurtunity arose (thus the charge being reduced then reinstated).
I cannot speak to the veracity, but I found several sources on Google that indicated that the 'rape' was having sex without a condom. That the sex was completely consensual (if foolish). Again, I dont have stats, but how many men go to jail is sweeden every year for doing a woman (or in this case 2 women) bareback. With their concent.
It is possible I suppose that they withdrew consent as some sources claim, but that becomes a he-said she-said thing. Add to that the fact that neither woman seemed phased by the encounters until they talked to each other and it becomes even more fishy and sounds like sour grapes.
Add to THAT the pressure the US government is surely putting on the Swedes, and you have a nice little setup.
The entire thing has oddity written all over it, and frnakly as much as I think the guy is an arrogant douchebag, I would do the same thing in his situation.
Re:OK, this is senseless (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, it's because of such simplistic stereotypes about how rape victims are supposed to behave that so many sexual assaults still go unreported. Once you know that most rapes are committed by people the victim knew, you can understand why not all victims immediately go to the police. It's perfectly understandable that, if they had already had consensual intercourse before, the alleged victim would feel bad about what happened afterward if she did not agree to having sex without a condom but did not immediately report it. It's a common reaction and victims often need the help of their family or friends to fully understand what has happened to them and realize that it was rape. The fact that they "didn't seem phased" doesn't mean much, as there are many cases of rape victims dating and having subsequent intercourse with their rapist (clear-cut example: all those who were victims of marital rape).
See for references to published research: http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/pub_victim_responses_sexual_assault.pdf [ndaa.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Ya I think the geeks need to do a bit more research on rape victims and what goes on. The near universal geek reaction seems to be "This is such bullshit, he didn't rape her, she's a liar clearly!" Well my sister, who is getting a PhD in sociology relating to women's issues has a rather different view: She says ya, she could see this being true. Assange is clearly a person with boundary issues, and the way the victims have acted is quite consistent with how many women act, including ones she's interviewed.
N
Re: (Score:2)
If it was you or I, then generally I would agree with you. However when you're considered the enemy he is by the US, Sweden, et al, you need to not only think of your next step but your next several as well as your exits. Regardless of if he might be exonerated in Sweden, I don't think the likelihood of him continuing to live a life of freedom would exist as he'd promptly be handed over to US authorities.
It's also worth noting that he hasn't even been charged with a crime in Sweden. He's only wanted for
Re: (Score:2)
If it was what the rest of the world considers rape and there weren't so many questions surrounding the 'victim''s apparent reluctance to cooperate with the prosecution, I might agree.
What he is charged with is what most of the world would call 'turning out to be a douche the morning after'.
Re: (Score:3)
Now, this is - at a minimum - assault, if she didn't wish to be restrained the way he did. If he was penetrating her while restraining her against her wishes, this would be rape.
Taken out of context. She seemed to be consenting, then when he went to consummate the act, she stopped him and said she wanted him to use a condom. So he put a condom on. At least that's what SHE says happened. That isn't considered rape anywhere else.
He violated the condition of her consent - that a condom be used. Therefore, he did not have her consent. Having sex with someone, when you knowingly violate the conditions that they place on their consent, is rape. In any civilized country in the world, it's rape.
Translation, he did use a condom as she asked, but it broke. Not considered rape anywhere else.
Again, if she was unwilling to be touched this way... and she expressed that wish to him... this is, at a minimum, assault.
They had been in a sexual relationship for a week by then (including after counts one and two, so she apparently wasn't thinking of those as rape at the time). So h
Re: (Score:2)
He can only be granted asylum if he can get to or is on Ecaudor and likely the last chance he had to do so was before he was taken into custody.
Re:OK, this is senseless (Score:5, Insightful)
Listen to Assange's side of the story.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9309000/9309320.stm [bbc.co.uk]
He isn't wanted for a crime in Sweden, only for "questioning" by a prosecutor. He was in Sweden for 5 weeks following the alleged incidents so there was ample opportunity for this. When he left, he wasn't running from the Swedish authorities like a fugitive. He's also willing to speak with the Swedish prosecutor, but he didn't want to go back to Sweden to do it.
I think this reeks of conspiracy.
Re: (Score:2)
"I will not compromise. Not even in the face of Armageddon."
Even if they threatened to make you watch that animal crackers scene over and over again?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:And..."I suppose it was only a matter of time." (Score:5, Insightful)
Besides the way Obama's dealt with this Wikileaks issue I otherwise like him
So this bothers you, but his treatment of Thomas Drake doesn't? Or the fact that he considers legal medical marijuana dispensaries in California to be a higher priority target than the investment bankers who crashed the economy in 2008? Or his continued use of unconstitutional warrantless wiretaps? Or that he signed the blatantly unconstitutional 2012 NDAA? Or his unilateral assassination of American citizens abroad?
The chief of the ACLU is "disgusted" [politico.com] with Obama. You should be too.
Re: (Score:3)
and don't try to tell me a Republican would be more sympathetic.
Who said anything about Republicans? Vote third party or stay the fuck home.
As I admitted, this is the (FAR) lesser of two evils in my estimate
You're still voting for evil.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe that's a "legitimate criminal charge," but the US government does exactly the same, quite regularly and quite without remorse.
Unless we have double-standards, allowing POTUS to do it to others makes it nonsensical to condemn when others do it to POTUS.
Re:He's in big trouble (Score:5, Funny)
First, he'll have to learn to drive on the other side of the road. Then a crash course in Spanish won't hurt.
Here's a starter: Alto! = Stop! Tus papeles por favor = Your papers please
He's going to Ecuador, not Texas...