4 ms·

Wait, hold on a minute here, I was assured that the one thing Assange should have done years ago was turn himself over to the authorities and let justice take h

by Tycho 7y ago

Wait, hold on a minute here, I was assured that the one thing Assange should have done years ago was turn himself over to the authorities and let justice take his course. Can someone explain to me how things could have diverged so badly from the expected path?

fit2rule 7y ago
You were lied to - Assange is in the target of a large, highly profitable military-industrial-complex. Actual justice is not on the table; anyone paying attention has known this for years.
- bilekas 7y ago
  > Assange is in the target of a large, highly profitable military-industrial-complex Woah there, went full tinfoil hat on us for a moment. Agree, their intentions are probably to set an example and will act aggressively on Assange as much as possible, but they are still bound by their laws.. And in turn; 'justice'.
- threeseed 7y ago
  Everything is being done in pretty strict accordance with the law. US believes he committed a serious crime and as such it's expected they would seek extradition just like with every other person who does so.
  - raxxorrax 7y ago
    > Everything is being done in pretty strict accordance with the law. Everything besides the war crimes he uncovered? Yeah, sure. He dropped the pants of high government officials and this is simply a case of revenge. Let's call it what it is.
  - lovich 7y ago
    Aren't we reading about the US government denying that he has 1st amendment rights when the US government is restricted from denying those rights by the 1st amendment? The amendment doesn't specify US citizens get a positive right, it limits the government itself
    - celticmusic 7y ago
      This is what I find hilarious about the sorts of comments you're replying to. It doesn't make sense unless you refuse to think about it and apply a modicum of consistent logic to it.
ben_w 7y ago
If Assange had gone to Sweden in 2010, and been found guilty and gone to prison, he might have finished his sentence before the USA officially decided to try him with their 2017 (?) indictment. Even if he was still in prison, Sweden is at least as capable of resisting USA extradition requests as the UK. Even if he wasn’t in prison/an embassy (either not guilty or guilty and released after doing time), the indictment would’ve happened anyway, and led to another extradition attempt anyway wherever he was — including, I recon, if he went straight from Sweden to Ecuador, given that Ecuador did remove his asylum. Either way, his conditions would’ve been better between them and now, but also the situation right now would be the same (except for the time spent in a UK prison for breach of bail, and held by the authorities while waiting for an extradition hearing, and the loss of bail bond money from his supporters) except that either he would be exonerated from sexual assault charges or a dangerous narcissistic rapist would’ve been punished with a prison sentence rather than allowed to present themselves as a victim [delete as appropriate].
- vidarh 7y ago
  If he had been tried in Sweden in 2010, and there were no political machinations, he'd have been out probably by 2013-2015. Sentences in Sweden are short across the board - you can find even convictions for violent rapes in Sweden that results in sentences no longer than that. But that rests on a lot of assumptions, such as that there wouldn't have been an earlier US indictment if he'd been conveniently accessible. And of course it rests on the assumption that Sweden would have been as "capable of resisting" extradition. Which is a big question - one of the results of "Cablegate" was that we know that years after the Swedish government found out Swedish police was complicit in blatantly illegal rendition of two political asylum seekers who were afterwards tortured after being handed over to the government they were fleeing, the US was chastised secretly by the Swedish government after Swedish military intelligence caught Swedes assisting illegal rendition flights via Sweden. Nobody were ever tried for either incident. So it's not clear whether or not Sweden is even capable of stopping the US from unilaterally doing as it pleases, before even consider whether Sweden would want to. I'm inclined to think the oddities in the Swedish case was down to domestic Swedish issues rather than US involvement, but at the same time I know for my part if I had feared US prosecution, I'd much rather stay in the UK than go to Sweden.

by Tycho 7y ago

fit2rule 7y ago

You were lied to - Assange is in the target of a large, highly profitable military-industrial-complex. Actual justice is not on the table; anyone paying attention has known this for years.

bilekas 7y ago
> Assange is in the target of a large, highly profitable military-industrial-complex Woah there, went full tinfoil hat on us for a moment. Agree, their intentions are probably to set an example and will act aggressively on Assange as much as possible, but they are still bound by their laws.. And in turn; 'justice'.
threeseed 7y ago
Everything is being done in pretty strict accordance with the law. US believes he committed a serious crime and as such it's expected they would seek extradition just like with every other person who does so.
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  > Everything is being done in pretty strict accordance with the law. Everything besides the war crimes he uncovered? Yeah, sure. He dropped the pants of high government officials and this is simply a case of revenge. Let's call it what it is.
- lovich 7y ago
  Aren't we reading about the US government denying that he has 1st amendment rights when the US government is restricted from denying those rights by the 1st amendment? The amendment doesn't specify US citizens get a positive right, it limits the government itself
  - celticmusic 7y ago
    This is what I find hilarious about the sorts of comments you're replying to. It doesn't make sense unless you refuse to think about it and apply a modicum of consistent logic to it.

ben_w 7y ago

If Assange had gone to Sweden in 2010, and been found guilty and gone to prison, he might have finished his sentence before the USA officially decided to try him with their 2017 (?) indictment. Even if he was still in prison, Sweden is at least as capable of resisting USA extradition requests as the UK. Even if he wasn’t in prison/an embassy (either not guilty or guilty and released after doing time), the indictment would’ve happened anyway, and led to another extradition attempt anyway wherever he was — including, I recon, if he went straight from Sweden to Ecuador, given that Ecuador did remove his asylum. Either way, his conditions would’ve been better between them and now, but also the situation right now would be the same (except for the time spent in a UK prison for breach of bail, and held by the authorities while waiting for an extradition hearing, and the loss of bail bond money from his supporters) except that either he would be exonerated from sexual assault charges or a dangerous narcissistic rapist would’ve been punished with a prison sentence rather than allowed to present themselves as a victim [delete as appropriate].

vidarh 7y ago
If he had been tried in Sweden in 2010, and there were no political machinations, he'd have been out probably by 2013-2015. Sentences in Sweden are short across the board - you can find even convictions for violent rapes in Sweden that results in sentences no longer than that. But that rests on a lot of assumptions, such as that there wouldn't have been an earlier US indictment if he'd been conveniently accessible. And of course it rests on the assumption that Sweden would have been as "capable of resisting" extradition. Which is a big question - one of the results of "Cablegate" was that we know that years after the Swedish government found out Swedish police was complicit in blatantly illegal rendition of two political asylum seekers who were afterwards tortured after being handed over to the government they were fleeing, the US was chastised secretly by the Swedish government after Swedish military intelligence caught Swedes assisting illegal rendition flights via Sweden. Nobody were ever tried for either incident. So it's not clear whether or not Sweden is even capable of stopping the US from unilaterally doing as it pleases, before even consider whether Sweden would want to. I'm inclined to think the oddities in the Swedish case was down to domestic Swedish issues rather than US involvement, but at the same time I know for my part if I had feared US prosecution, I'd much rather stay in the UK than go to Sweden.