Assange Requests Asylum In Ecuador 400
david.emery writes "Julian Assange, his appeals in the United Kingdom having run out, today went to the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to request asylum from his pending extradition to Sweden to face questioning for 'unlawful coercion and sexual misconduct including rape.'"
Smart move (Score:4, Insightful)
Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa is a friend of Venezuela and Cuba--and NO FRIEND of the U.S.
Re:Smart move (Score:5, Informative)
Ecuador's foreign minister had offered assylum in 2010 but president Rafael Correa later dismised it. It's possible they have succombed to US pressure already, or they could be worried he has something they don't want released.
Should be an interesting turn of events either way. I do hope he finds refuge somewhere, to continue the good fight.
Re: (Score:3)
Ecuador's foreign minister had offered assylum in 2010 but president Rafael Correa later dismised it. It's possible they have succombed to US pressure already
Well, in that case couldn't the Ecuadorians choose to hand him over to the US.
Nevertheless, I don't see why he's avoiding extradition to Sweden, it's certainly not the worst country in the world. And the US have yet to raise any charges... Which I think would be unlikely to stick in any event.
Re:Smart move (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm in New Zealand where the US FBI is getting the NZ Government to charge the owner of MegaUpload 'Kim DotcCom' on their behalf. There is nothing wrong with this, it is part of NZs responsibilities. However, the FBI have been duplicating the MegaUpload harddrives while in New Zealand despite not being permitted to.
In short, the FBI broke New Zealand law. Maybe the US would respect Ecuadorean law if Assange were there, maybe they wouldn't. The USA does more good things than people give them credit for, and I personally am pretty pro-US, but the evidence is the US flouts international laws and norms when it suits them.
If I were Assange then seeking asylum is possibly not a bad thing (issuing an Interpol warrant for the charges he faced is pretty extreme - it shows the lengths that the Powers That Be will go to in order to silence this whistle-blower [he didn't report anything false, just made duplicity publicly known]).
Re: (Score:3)
Nevertheless, I don't see why he's avoiding extradition to Sweden
It's probably something to do with the special "Temporary Surrender" agreement Sweden has with the USA.
See: http://justice4assange.com/US-Extradition.html [justice4assange.com]
Once he's on Swedish soil he can theoretically be transferred to the USA on almost any pretext and with very little due process.
[Stupid] move (Score:2)
It makes him look guilty of the "not wearing a condom" charge. He should just go face the trial, especially since there's no way they can prove he's guilty (it's just her word vs. his).
Re:[Stupid] move (Score:4, Insightful)
the "not wearing a condom" charge
Are you really naive enough to believe that's what ANY of this is about?
I mean, seriously?
Re:[Stupid] move (Score:4, Insightful)
>>>Are you really naive enough to believe that's what ANY of this is about?
I guess I am. Prove to me that something more nefarious is going on with this Sweden Condom Non-wearing case?
Re:[Stupid] move (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I guess I am. Prove to me that something more nefarious is going on with this Sweden Condom Non-wearing case?
How about the Interpol arrest warrant?
Interpol aren't policemen. Interpol's job is to coordinate police forces of different countries when they're working on catching people who operate in those countries. They provide interpreters, make sure everybody has copies of all the evidence, etc. There's no way they can be involved in something that only happened in one country and in fact their constitution forbids it..
Their constitution also forbids them getting involved in any crime which doesn't carry a minimum
Re: (Score:3)
Well, now it's about flushing $320000 of bail down the judicial drain. Not to mention the additional criminal charge (Bail Act offense, or whatever is applicable in the United Kingdom in this instance -- not my area of law).
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
If it is all that, ask for that fine, and prohibit him from going back into the country. Why do Sweden need to force him back into the country to face the penalty of being prohibited to get back in the country?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Apparently, they can't even officially charge someone with a crime until they have met in person with the prosecutors.
Additionally, they must meet the prosecutors in Sweden (a Swedish embassy is no good) and it must be a face to face meeting (over teleconference is not good).
Re: (Score:3)
Horseshit. If this was their system of laws, then surely it must have been put to use before Assange. Strangely, it hasn't.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
this is horseshit.
>> he broke the law to the point he used his influence to do things that would get other men arrested too.
what law did he break? and if he broke the law, why hasn't he been charged? and why do Sweden need to extradite someone to answer some questions about an investigation — not even a charge?
>> In most countries, what he did would be considered douchebaggery of the highest proportions. In Sweden, they find it criminal...even if it is pretty much a slap on the wrist. When
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:[Stupid] move (Score:5, Interesting)
He was given permission to leave Sweden. So he did. Then something weird and as yet unexplained happened and another prosecutor decided he was guilty of something without including the two women the original questioning had been about.
I've never heard of this "have to be in Sweden to be questioned by a prosecutor" before. Presumably neither Assange nor his lawyers have as well. The prosecutor was asked several times to come to London during the last 450+ days of house arrest but refused without saying why.
If a prosecutor is enough of a "judicial authority" (not in this country they aren't) to authorise a EAW then the Swedish embassy is Swedish enough to be a venue for questioning.
Re: (Score:3)
The prosecutor was asked several times to come to London during the last 450+ days of house arrest but refused without saying why.
Or even better, why didn't they fly a judge from Sweden to the UK to have the trial there, acquit Assange, and send him on his way? Isn't that the way that Justice normally works? When the suspect refuses to return and fights extradition, don't you normally fly the judge to them? Is that what your country does? Why not? Do you claim that they "refused without saying why"? You seem to have a very odd view of how the judicial system works in any country, let alone Sweden.
If a prosecutor is enough of a "judicial authority" (not in this country they aren't) to authorise a EAW then the Swedish embassy is Swedish enough to be a venue for questioning.
Yes, and the point must be made
Re: (Score:3)
Conspiracy theories always include a way for the little guy to fight back, the David vs Goliath story. There aren't any conspiracy theories I know of that say we're all doomed so just huddle in your basements. There's always some sort of way for those in the know to resist: tin foil hats, spreading informational fliers, not using currency, etc. So the theories can get more complex in order to provide an out for the repressed.
Of the two countries, the UK would seem much more likely to hand over someone in
Re:[Stupid] move (Score:4, Informative)
I live and Sweden and everything you type (and belive) about Sweden is wrong; the only thing you are right about is that Assange is a douchbag.
Getting convicted for ANY violent crime in Sweden with out a confession is very uncommon. We have several cases of murder where all the partisipants have gone free since it has been impossible to prove which one of the accused delivered the killing blow, and they have been convicted of desecrating a corpse since it was impossible to prove that the person was alive when they delivered their blow. A few years back we had a guy who was equitted of rape since he was the last one in the gang rape to have sex with the girl. When it was his turn she was so chocked that she was paralysed. The Swedish court ruled that since she had not protested he was off the hook for rape.
It is unheard of that the Swedish court goes after a man because a woman is pissed because he screwed around. Hunting him across the globe? We don't even do that with convicted killers!
Strange that we have an American deserter turning up so close to Assange getting here. I wonder if there will be two people on that plane back to the US of A.
Re: (Score:3)
He was a big name, and he broke the law to the point he used his influence to do things that would get other men arrested too. And then instead of answering the charges, he fled the country.
Ahem... what charges?
You are wrong. (Score:5, Informative)
Some points to notice, in case you care amidst your ad hominems and strawmen.
1. He didn't break the law. The women who he supposedly "raped" only got pissed because they found out Assange had sex with both of them. The other even tweeted how cool it was to meet Assange and how she couldn't "wait to meet the cool people [incl. Assange] again this evening" (this was following the "rape"). If you were really raped, would you be tweeting like that? No.
2. Assange did not flee. He was not told to stay. There was ample time to collect Assange, but nothing was done, so Assange left after several days. Once Assange went out of the country the Swedish prosecutor went apeshit. Assange become an Interpol wanted persona. Of course, this was according to plan.
The saddest part of Wikileaks is that even after they show irrefutable proof of war crimes and other nasty dealings, what is the reaction - people just chant their national anthem louder. That is sad and disgusting.
It's almost as disgusting as people fervently defending that massive system which conducts those kind of abuses on a daily basis.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:You are wrong. (Score:5, Informative)
From what I understand, the term 'rape' is very broad in this country. To the point, people that have been actually raped elsewhere would feel violated.
No, that's bad translation. He's suspected of statutory rape, not rape. Sweden uses the same word for both (lit. "violent taking"), but the law distinguishes between the two.
As well as a case of "sexual misconduct" ("ofredande" - another word that translates to multiple meanings in English, including harassment, assault, discord and molestation. The closest word translation is "disturbance of peace", but that's not the meaning):
"[he] who exposes himself to another in a manner that is likely to cause discomfort, or otherwise by words or conduct [ofredar] a person in a manner that is likely to offend that person's sexual integrity."
Here in the US, the closest thing to these charges would be "statutory rape" and "sexual assault", but that's because we have little nuances and leeway left after the "tough on crimes" movement that has done such wonders in keeping us all safe...
Sweden, on the other hand, are far more lenient.
Re: (Score:3)
Treason is not a crime if you aren't a citizen...regardless of what Republicans would like to have you believe
And being a military aged man within 100 meters of an al-quaeda suspect doesn't make you an enemy combatant either.
But the argument is moot if the drone strike kills you.
Simply being innocent isn't protection. He (rightly in my opinion) beleives the US system cannot be relied upon to treat him justly, so its better to stay out of the system.
Re: (Score:3)
And then instead of answering the charges, he fled the country.)
I'm sorry, but he did answer the charges.
When all charges were dropped, he asked if he was free to leave the country. Sweden said yes.
Re: (Score:3)
And then instead of answering the charges, he fled the country.
By "fled the country" you mean "asked prosecutors if it was ok if he leave then continued on his way", right?
Re:[Stupid] move (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're not a U.S. citizen you also have no constitutional rights
That's odd. I'm sure the fifth amendment begins with "No person". Not "No citizen of the US". Further to that, Article III asserts the supremacy of the US Supreme Court in applying the constitution to foreign citizens and amendment six refers to "the accused", not "the accused, if they happen to be born in the US and haven't pissed us off enough to ship them off to Guantanamo or add them to Obama's Kill List".
Just because you don't like the idea of justice doesn't mean it's not legally binding.
Re:[Stupid] move (Score:5, Insightful)
It makes him look guilty of the "not wearing a condom" charge. He should just go face the trial, especially since there's no way they can prove he's guilty (it's just her word vs. his).
Are you really naive enough to believe that's what ANY of this is about?
I guess I'm just as naive as cpu6502, because I believe this too. Honestly, my first thought on reading this was "urgh, that does NOT look good...guy looks like he's running for cover". Innocent or guilty, running off to South America has a strong appearance of someone trying to escape the law.
Do I think the U.S. government is completely ambivalent about the chap? Well, duh, of course they're likely to be somewhat annoyed. Do I think this entire shambles is some huge conspiracy? And that Sweden, of all places, is just going to roll over in acquiescence? Come on...
Assange is a creep. Looking at the whole "using force" bit, the "not using a condom when you knew full well the woman didn't want that" bit, the guy is a jerk and a creep. Yes, you might think he's a hero with Wikileaks. That doesn't mean he's not a creep. In some countries what he did would just get him branded a creep; in Sweden, they are a bit more adamant about protecting women's rights and they think he did something criminal.
If he doesn't like it and says the charges are without basis, well, man up and go back and fight the charges, and then bugger off to Ecuador or anywhere else you want to, in a fit of self-righteous pique. But the guy needs to take responsibility for his actions.
Personally I think half the reason he doesn't want to is because he's afraid he won't get yanked out to the United States. That would really damage his whole martyr/conspiracy victim image. Without that he's a seriously underwhelming and unprepossessing figure. He'll get prosecuted, he'll be freed, or he might serve some jail time, and in a few months or a few years he'll come out, not having been assassinated. But by then everyone will have forgotten about him.
Re:[Stupid] move (Score:5, Informative)
What makes you think he'd ever face trial if he ended up in Sweden? Sweden has illegally rendered [egyptindependent.com] political refugees to the US to be tortured in the past. What makes you think they wouldn't do the same to Assange?
Re:[Stupid] move (Score:5, Informative)
Disclaimer: I'm a Swedish resident, and thus biased.
To answer your question; because Sweden has changed. At the time when the Egyptians were rendered, the Swedish population was convinced that Sweden was the best freest and marvelousest country the entire world. We simply didn't pay attention to things like this, because quite frankly we couldn't believe it would happen. The case of the Egyptians was a big eye opener for many here, and we were quite pissed off (well, as pissed off as Swedish people get).
The Assange case has, before anything really bad has even happened, attracted an enormous amount of publicity, and thus has the attention of every Swedish resident before it has even started (w/r to comparing it to the Egyptians). Some here may think Assange is an ass, some may think he should be put in prison and rot, and some may think he's innocent and/or a hero, but nobody seems to think that he should be given to the US. The public is keeping a very close eye on this case, and an extradition would be a political shit storm beyond anything we've seen for ages.
I'm honestly not particularly proud of how "my" country has acted in this - I can certainly see that the Swedish prosecution seems quite incompetent - but I really do not think that Assange would be dumped off the US. It would be political suicide for everybody involved in the process.
Re: (Score:3)
Because as a matter of process you have to be questioned before you're charged.
Re: (Score:3)
Because, yet again, as a matter of process the next step is (potentially) charging you, which requires them to have you in custody.
This is standard procedure.
Re: (Score:3)
You're confused, because 'charged' does not mean what you think it means in the Swedish justice system.
In the Swedish System 'charged' is the step where they take you before a court to get judged and sentenced. Before they can do that they obviously need to finish their investigation which includes questioning the subject.
Re:[Stupid] move (Score:5, Informative)
The reason you're confused is because you're trying to find a direct analogue for 'charged' when there isn't any.
The way things work is that the police investigate a crime, and once they find a suspect they will inform him about their suspicions and ask him to come in for questioning.
This questioning can legally only be done physically in person, not by email, not by telephone, not by video-conference. If you do not come voluntarily then they will arrest you and bring you in for questioning instead.
After questioning you will then either be released (minor crime or suspicions withdrawn) or jailed (major crime or just afraid you'll flee the country) at which point the prosecutor will take the case to court. As you can imagine the jailing part of that gets really rather complicated if you try to do it through teleconference.
Sweden is a very bureaucratic country, this means that if procedure states things are to be done in this order, then they will be done in this order and few if any exceptions will ever be made for any reason.
Re: (Score:3)
So, my cant the question him at their embasy in london, or question him over the phone ?
If its not a setup, then why is the prosecution prepared to waste time and money trying trying to put him in a cell before they ask questions.
So, is it common practice for your country to fly prosecutors or judges to speak to people who refuse to surrender and fight extradition for crimes like rape? Or does the government simply seek extradition? Your question is nonsense - countries don't do that. Do you think you could phone up the judge and tell him you don't want to come to his court despite a summons? That he can just conduct the business over the phone? Not so much.
Re: (Score:3)
Sweden has an extradition treaty with a "conditional release" clause that allows them to extradite Assange without as much judicial review as the UK.
Re:[Stupid] move (Score:4)
European Arrest Warrant specifies that secondary extraditions require both the consent of the country extraditing and the original country. Assange is, if anything, safer in Sweden.
Re:[Stupid] move (Score:4, Insightful)
>>>" those CIA agents over in that other plane are going to have a word with you. Goodbye."
Why do you think that will happen? I'd like some citations, not some random Alex Jones-style conspriacist rambling. Kay-kay? Thanks.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:[Stupid] move (Score:5, Insightful)
Who died because of his actions? Name a single person who died. Link to a single story in a reputable newspaper that details how someone lost their life as a result of leaks he published.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Reminder:
"In April 2011, Ecuador expelled the U.S. ambassador after a leaked diplomatic cable was shown accusing president Correa of knowingly ignoring police corruption. In retaliation, the Ecuadorian ambassador Luis Gallegos was expelled from the United States.[1]"
Assange should find a good audience amongst Correa's corrupt and human rights abusing buddies. Assange continues to discard his principles - if he still has any remaining.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Stop beating your meat to your masochistic prison torture fantasies. Wikileaks mismanged itself into death, while Assange had burned bridges with everyone. He'll spend a couple years in a nice comfy swedish reformatory dormitory and everyone will forget about him except his groupies.
Re:Dumb reading (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
In general stuff that if it really supprised you, then you are an idiot.
Strawman. Whether or not a person is suprised is not even in question. Like all right thinking people I was repulsed, angered, but not surprised that boys were being raped and the US was complicit in these horrific acts.
yes we all know our respective countries feed us a degree of propaganda. Because there are some voter disapproved things that need to be done to keep alies, or some representatives who can't keep their mouth shut or use the information to mess up a plan. Nothing leaked from Wikileaks was that big deal if you think a little more big picture.
I see. And what of the murdered and raped people in question? Was it a big deal for them? Should they have focused on the bigger picture? If I bombed your daughters wedding and slaughtered your family and then stole your son and raped him, would you just accept that I did that for the gre
Re:Dumb reading (Score:5, Interesting)
Way to drink the kool-aid. That or you are astro turfing.
He's not even being charged by the women involved anymore. The women suddenly wanted to charge him AFTER they were approached by a swedish prosecutor. They later attempted to drop the charges, were told they couldn't, eventually succeeded in dropping the charges, only to have the charges somehow re-instituted by a swedish prosecutor with known high up US ties under pressure from the swedish government.
This is all as reported by the SWEDISH Press. Stop fucking astro-turfing to attempt to cover this shit up. This is the most blatant abuse of power by the US over its allies I've ever seen.
Re:Dumb reading (Score:4, Insightful)
Sweden is not a lap dog of the United States.
Assange should show up in Sweden, get the case resolved, then go home. End of paranoid story.
Re:Dumb reading (Score:5, Informative)
Sweden is not a lap dog of the United States.
Assange should show up in Sweden, get the case resolved, then go home. End of paranoid story.
I'm certain you are correct. What could possibly go wrong? [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Would you be willing to bet your life on it though? I know I wouldn't. And seems Assange would prefer not to as well.
Re: (Score:3)
Way to drink the kool-aid. That or you are astro turfing.
He's not even being charged by the women involved anymore. The women suddenly wanted to charge him AFTER they were approached by a swedish prosecutor. They later attempted to drop the charges, were told they couldn't, eventually succeeded in dropping the charges, only to have the charges somehow re-instituted by a swedish prosecutor with known high up US ties under pressure from the swedish government.
This is all as reported by the SWEDISH Press. Stop fucking astro-turfing to attempt to cover this shit up. This is the most blatant abuse of power by the US over its allies I've ever seen.
This may be a newsflash to you, but victims don't charge defendants. They're even usually referred to as "complaining witnesses". Prosecutors charge defendants, and only prosecutors can bring charges or drop them. Even if what you said was true about women, which it isn't, they would lack any power to "charge" him or "drop the charges". Hence, why should we believe your frothing rantings about astro-turfing and abuses of power?
Re:Dumb reading (Score:4, Funny)
>>>He is in trouble for obtaining a sex act that the other partner did not consent to
Som she claims. Several days later. AFTER she found-out the Assange was two-timing her. If you believe this woman you're really gullible, and I have a 6 GHZ laptop you might be interested in.
Re: (Score:3)
It took me about three months before I was comfortable using the word "rape" for what happened to me. It takes time to get past blaming yourself and trying to convince yourself it was nothing because there exist others who had it worse than you. I met a girl who actually started dating the guy who raped her just so that it wouldn't seem so much like rape. You just don't want to see yourself as a victim. Not only because it feels demeaning to yourself, to have become victimized, but because whether consc
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But I wonder if the next time someone in Sweden (but, for the sake of argument, someone who hasn't angered our rulers as Assange has) has sex with a sleeping partner and skips the country, there will again be a European arrest order and a worldwide Interpol hunt?
how is he going to leave the UK? (Score:3)
the cops can't touch the embassy or their cars but once he steps out in the airport he is fair game
Re: (Score:3)
I'm pretty sure they could sneak him out if they really wanted to. With diplomatic immunity, can the police even stop one of their cars?
Re: (Score:3)
Bearing in mind that the UK is not China, and would hopefully behave in a more civilized manner.
Re:how is he going to leave the UK? (Score:4, Informative)
Would they even need to sneak him out? I am not really sure how asylum works; if Ecuador says, "Yes, Assange has asylum here," would the UK government have to allow them to move Assange to an airplane and fly him out of the country?
Nope.
The Ecuadorians have diplomatic immunity, not Assange. Assange doesn't suddenly gain immunity by proxy.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Put him in a bag labeled "diplomatic mail"
verification:luggage
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, nevermind, apparently I missed part of the summary. Looks like he found a way into the Ecuadorian embassy, so I guess the question is, how will he find his way out of the UK from there?
In theory, he doesn't have to. Why does he have to leave the Ecuadorian embassy?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Based on my undergraduate degree in Law and Order, and a master's in CSI, I can confidently state that the interior of an embassy car holds the same legal status as the embassy itself. The police can stop the car and speak with the driver, but they have no authority to inspect its interior.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course they can stop the car.
Re: (Score:2)
That is assuming that they would even give Ecuador a hard time about moving Assange out of their country, which I am not even sure they would do.
Re: (Score:3)
...hope that he steps out to pee.
He won't need to if he's still wearing that condom.
Re:how is he going to leave the UK? (Score:4, Interesting)
All this trouble. (Score:2, Insightful)
Is he really that afraid that he won't get a fair trial - in Sweden?!?
Is there something about the Swedish judicial system that I don't know about? Is it a kangaroo court or something?
What is Assange afraid of?
Re:All this trouble. (Score:5, Informative)
Well, it's not the first time the swedish government bows before their master: http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/default.aspx?pageid=438&n=egyptian-deported-from-sweden-by-cia-freed-2011-08-11 [hurriyetdailynews.com]
Re:All this trouble. (Score:5, Insightful)
Is he really that afraid that he won't get a fair trial - in Sweden?!?
No, he's not *afraid* of it. He *knows* it. This whole thing was such an obvious setup from the get-go that I'm surprised the CIA had the balls to even try it. Shit, even Dominique Strauss-Kahn was less obvious than this mess.
Re: (Score:3)
Honestly, I'm surprised that they haven't just assassinated him.
Re:All this trouble. (Score:5, Insightful)
The CIA has apparently gotten away from that (especially with public figures). Public discrediting works just as effectively, doesn't leave behind a martyr, and isn't as obvious. So if some asshole is criticizing the value of the U.S. dollar [guardian.co.uk], you don't send up a guy with a gun to his room, you send up a maid shaking her ass. Much cleaner that any bullet to the head, and just as effective.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Excuse me, Sir, but your tinfoil hat has slipped a bit to the side.
There is somewhat of a difference between someone who thinks that aliens at Area 51 are teaming with the CIA to steal his urine--and someone who thinks that the CIA takes covert action against foreign nationals who threaten the security of U.S. confidential information.
Re:All this trouble. (Score:5, Insightful)
Is he really that afraid that he won't get a fair trial - in Sweden?!?
The charges were dropped, then mysteriously the investigation was reopened. If you had sent copies of the secrets of the world's most powerful government to everyone else, would you not be a little nervous about unusual criminal proceedings?
Re: (Score:2)
Not being mentioned for an entire news cycle.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't you know this is all a global conspiracy against him? This is all a plot by the US Government, The Reptilians and probably the Rothschilds and Bilderberg Group trying to kill him.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't flatter yourself, this is hardly some super-elaborate global conspiracy. Setting a dude up with sex is one of the oldest intelligence ploys in the book (the Germans even used it on JFK). And getting a country like Sweden to bow like a lapdog to you when you're the U.S. is hardly a challenge.
Re: (Score:3)
He's already long since burned all his bridges. They would have ceased caring by this point if it was all nothing but phoney charges. Outside of the loon fringe cheerleaders, no one even still cares about what this guy says.
Re: (Score:2)
Whether he's still active or not, getting him and punishing him is still important to the U.S. because it sends a clear message to anyone thinking of doing something like Wikileaks in the future. "Reveal our secrets, and we WILL get you."
Re: (Score:2)
Why? He's already been globally discredited and made countless enemies of past associates and allies. The US or Sweden gain nothing by continuing to try to push phoney charges since he already as been punished and the message has been sent. Last time I checked no one else has taken his place so it seems the message has rang clear.
Re:All this trouble. (Score:4, Informative)
They would have ceased caring by this point if it was all nothing but phoney charges
The Swedes did drop the charges, for lack of evidence. Someone cared enough to reopen the investigation and try to force Assange to go back to Sweden.
I do not think it is a stretch to suggest that the US government had something to do with that.
Re: (Score:3)
And from my point of view I see a female prosecutor that's made a career out of prosecuting men for "rape" (Swedish definition) who saw a case dropped that fit her typical profile on a high profile target that would not only bring attention but full on front page press stories about the issue. She then reopened the case with the hope of prosecuting said famous person with the hope that all the attention this would bring would raise the issue in the minds of Swedish public and bring not only political but pu
Re:All this trouble. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The reason I have seen given for Assange to fear extradition to Sweden is that apparently it would be much easier to extradite him from from Sweden to the United States. In other words, it's not Sweden that he's afraid of, but that the Swedes will hand him over to the Americans with a wink and a nod.
Re: (Score:2)
He's not been CHARGED with anything - the cops just want to question him.
Ooops, but then Sweden, out of nowhere, gets a extradition order from the US. Not being charged in Sweden means local charges don't prevent him from leaving, so what do you know, Jules, welcome to GITMO.
Re: (Score:2)
What is Assange afraid of?
You, and people like you, who have already judged him guilty.
Re: (Score:2)
Why Ecuador? (Score:2)
hints that they may grant it (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
i don't know of anything that special about Ecuador
Ecuador is one of the very few countries in the world (along with Venezuela, Cuba, Iran, and North Korea) that doesn't kneel before the U.S.
Poor Wannabe James Bond (Score:2)
He's going to find out martinis and baccarat in Monte Carlo are not the same as beer and cockfights in Quito.......
Lets get a few things clear (Score:4, Insightful)
The woman that he is alleged to have raped has tried to drop the case that she was persuaded to bring.
In most of the world, if a woman does not want to bring a case, the suspect has nothing to answer. What he may have done does not seem to have offended her sufficiently for her to want a court case.
The prosecutor that has managed to bring this case is alleged to be a shill for the USA.
Assange has performed a huge service for the USA, Australia, the UK and loads of other places by bringing to light the crimes of those who see themselves as our betters. That is his real "crime"
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds like two positives. Everybody else should be judged fairly on their actions, and if their actions are bad, they should be ashamed.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
a half baked democracy on a third-world country (hey, I live on one of these, I know what I'm talking)
Greetings fellow USA resident
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, no.
You are moving fast, and the direction is correct. But you are still far, far away from a third world country.
Re: (Score:2)
He is truly this paranoid? Can someone get this man to a psychiatrist? He is only wanted for questioning. Sweden wont extradite him to USA. If you believe that you have been sucked in to the conspiracy nuts world.
This is so far from reality
No doubt about that. He has been ranting for months that the USA will secretly extradite him from Sweden (as if Sweden has already okayed this -- yeah right), ship him off to Guantanamo Bay (like Harold & Kumar, no doubt), and execute him shortly thereafter. Does that actually sound realistic to anybody with at least half a brain living in this USA? Hell, Obama would probably have a reception for him at the White House instead.
Re: (Score:2)