21 ms·
Ecuador grants Julian Assange asylum
- rms 14y agoI'd like to see a prediction market now for whether or not Assange makes it to Ecuador...
- jtudisco 14y agoYou never know.. He might already be there.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- cypherpunks01 14y agoSimilar, on Intrade: Julian Assange to be arrested by British police before midnight ET 31 Aug 2012 http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/contract/?contractId=764479 http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/contract/?contractId=76447...
- gaius 14y agoI am fascinated to see how they will physically transport him from the embassy to a plane. This has the makings of a top quality chase movie.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- tocomment 14y agoCould Ecuador have a boat waiting in international waters and take him via Helicopter to the boat? Otherwise could they hide him in some kind of cargo? I heard that they can't pull over and search a diplomats car but the transition from car to plane is when they could get him.
- gaius 14y agoHelicopter antics in London are pretty unlikely at the best of times, and right now we're tooled up for the Olympics too. The police have the power to stop the car, but not search it. Do diplomatic vehicles have toilets?
- stephengillie 14y agoCould they get a diplomatic charter bus?
- gsnedders 14y agoThey'd have to get across the pavement from the embassy into the bus. The British have every right to arrest him there (either for violating the conditions of bail or on grounds there is an outstanding European warrant for him).
- stephengillie 14y agoThe embassy doesn't have a paved space large enough for the first 5 feet of the bus to fit?
- gaius 14y agoThe "embassy" is not a compound, it's just an apartment in a normal building.
- cremnob 14y agoI think he's going to be in defacto prison. He might as well take it on the chin and do his time for rape.
- JCB_K 14y agoThe problem with that approach is that he expects be extradited to the US as soon as he gets to Sweden. Oh and you might call it nitpicking, but he's not convicted of rape yet, let alone charged with it.
- AndrewDucker 14y agoI still don't understand why Sweden is considered more likely to extradite to the US than Britain is...
- nhoj 14y agoI don't think many consider Sweden to be that. Maybe he is just trying to escape his accusations in Sweden?
- indiecore 14y agoNo, they've offered several times to allow Swedish officials to conduct whatever formalities they need to in the UK. They've refused. Sweden also has a history of dropping prisoners off at the airport where they get met by people who are DEFINITELY NOT CIA agents and disappeared.
- gsb 14y agoIn the UK an judge may make an independent determination that his 'crimes' are of a political nature and therefore not extraditable. In Sweden, there is a newish form of extradition, temporary surrender, where it is thought the decision can effectively be made by politicians instead of judges. Is he better off with a judge or a politician? Sweden has recent form for taking legal shortcuts in this area.
- davidw 14y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomatic_bag#Unusual_shipments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomatic_bag#Unusual_shipment...
- ConstantineXVI 14y agoThe UK's already "suggested" that they're willing to revoke Ecuador's diplomatic privilege. Discarding the question of if they can legally or politically do so for the moment, what difference would it make to them if Assange is in Ecuador's embassy or a crate with their flag stamped on it?
- mtgx 14y agoThey should take him with a helicopter. What are they going to do? Shoot it down?
- gsnedders 14y agoWhere are they going to get him into the helicopter?
- tocomment 14y agoEmbassy roof? Or drop a ladder down from the helicopter? I think the bigger question is how to get him out of the helicopter (since it can't fly to Ecuador.)
- Piskvorrr 14y agoNot how, where: international waters. London, IIRC, is not very distant from those. (Of course, London being a helicopter no-flight zone - for decades now - complicates things somewhat) Edit: Helicopters specifically; but with the ground-to-air missile sites installed around the Greater London area (ostensibly for protecting the Sporting-Event-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named; a WTF in and of itself), I'd be very careful in mucking around the British airspace: http://everything2.com/title/crashing+a+helicopter+in+Central+London+is+illegal http://everything2.com/title/crashing+a+helicopter+in+Centra...
- tocomment 14y agoIs it just no flight for helicopters? How about blimps? There's really got to be a solution here. It's a technical problem and we're technical people.
- gsnedders 14y agoIn general getting permission from ATC for flights over London is non-trivial (primarily because it is sufficiently densely populated that any emergency, especially at low altitude, is likely going to end badly).
- Terretta 14y agoRelevant text from Vienna Convention on Consular Relations: 1. The premises of the mission shall be inviolable. The agents of the receiving State may not enter them, except with the consent of the head of the mission. 2. The receiving State is under a special duty to take all appropriate steps to protect the premises of the mission against any intrusion or damage and to prevent any disturbance of the peace of the mission or impairment of its dignity. 3. The premises of the mission, their furnishings and other property thereon and the means of transport of the mission shall be immune from search, requisition, attachment or execution.
- mootothemax 14y agoI'd love to know what Assange's endgame plan for all of this fuss is. The States aren't going to extradite him from Sweden nor, evidently, from the UK. It makes me feel like a kiljoy to say it, but there isn't any conspiracy here, and nor will any play out. Let's face it - everything will play out normally and boringly, no matter how many people shout "conspiracy!" My gut instinct is that one way or another he'll end up in Sweden, either walking free or serving a year or two in jail, and then - what? Sitting in Parisian cafes gazing wistfully upon what once could have been?
- jonknee 14y ago> The States aren't going to extradite him from Sweden nor, evidently, from the UK. It makes me feel like a kiljoy to say it, but there isn't any conspiracy here, and nor will any play out. Let's face it - everything will play out normally and boringly, no matter how many people shout "conspiracy!" Why not? It seems a fair number of powerful people in the US would love to extradite him.
- Henn 14y agoExactly. The US want to extradite Richard O'Dwyer and Gary McKinnon so why not Assange?
- vidarh 14y agoIt's taken 10 years since McKinnon was arrested, and he's still not been handed over. When the current coalition gained power, his case was dragged out as justification for a review of the current extradition system, and a current pending review of McKinnon's case was effectively frozen and pushed under the rug quietly. In other words: The US is very successful at getting "ordinary criminals" extradited from the UK, but not so much when it comes to thornier cases like or example McKinnon's. Maybe he eventually gets extradited, but it might still drag on for ages. Meanwhile, Sweden has a history of having had its police drive people who were in their country seeking political asylum to the airport, handing them over to masked CIA agents and waiting while said CIA agents stripped the asylum seekers naked, drugged, handcuffed and chained them, and threw them on a plane to send them back to the Mubarak regime where they were tortured - Sweden has admitted as much, and paid restitution to at least one victim for torture as a direct result of Swedish actions in blatant contradiction of Swedish law. There was a massive outrage. Shortly afterwards, Swedish military intelligence determined that US intelligence agencies where still carrying out illegal rendition flights via Swedish airports with full knowing compliance from Swedish airport staff who apparently didn't get the memo... Or who got the wrong memo. Or something. I know which of the two places I would take my chances if I'd pissed off the US government.
- gitarr 14y agoAnd all just to keep a website on/off the internet.
- gary4gar 14y agoHe is not going to make it to Ecuador. Only thing Assange can do now is sit inside the embassy for indefinite period of time, until Ecuador gets bored with assange and figures he is not worth the damage of ties with Uk. another possible outcome is rather extreme -- UK goes on offences and arrests assange from the embassy. Either way, it would be interesting how the whole story will play-out.
- rwmj 14y agoWhat evidence do you have for your claim that "UK has already blocked Ecuador embassy's supplies"?
- oinksoft 14y agoThe source is a "tweet" saying that a truck carrying the next day's supplies for the embassy (whatever those comprise) was turned away. This message was from ... Wikileaks. But the BBC reported police surrounding the embassy so it is not unbelievable that a supply truck was turned away. https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/235953183032217600 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/235953183032217600
- ErrantX 14y agoI suspect you've misunderstood the tweet; the embassy is near Harrods, they are turning away ''Harrods'' suppliers. At least that is what I heard.
- peteretep 14y agoIt would be highly unusual for any Ecuadoreans to be living in the embassy, given that the UK is a stable, safe, and nominally friendly country. Perhaps it's one of the few non-US ones where that's true, but I doubt it. "Blocking supplies" is a weird concept for a building where and of the non-Assange residents can simply exit the building, walk 20m to the nearest Tesco, and return with 4 bags of vegetables and microwave dinners...
- deleted 14y ago
- beedogs 14y agoThe Minister of the Exterior's decision was... highly charged. He seemed to be making a stand for all of South America.
- politician 14y agoThe UK inflamed the situation with the irresponsible talk of storming Ecuador's embassy.
- objclxt 14y agoNo: Ecuador inflamed the situation by deliberately posting a bad translation of the letter sent to them by the UK. Britain never said they would 'storm' the embassy. They merely reminded Ecuador that their lawyers believed they could legally enter the embassy given appropriate notice (7 days). That is hardly 'storming'.
- politician 14y agoFair enough, but consider that although couched in diplomatic language the letter is nonetheless a threat.
- gavinlynch 14y agoIt's so disappointing to hear this repeated ad naseum as fact.
- gadders 14y agoAssange's credibility: shot. http://www.indexoncensorship.org/tag/Ecuador/ http://www.indexoncensorship.org/tag/Ecuador/ I suppose he's going to live his life like Roman Polanski, on the run from rape charges.
- sigzero 14y agoI totally agree.
- seanodonnell 14y agoWhat charges? This is mere extradition for questioning is Sweden is to be believed.
- UnoriginalGuy 14y agoHow has this hurt his credibility? Also the type of rape in this case and the Roman Polanski case aren't even remotely similar. In the UK, USA, or most other Western countries what he did isn't even illegal. It is essentially the sex version of fraud: lying to get ahead.
- gadders 14y agoThe UK Judge in his first extradition trial said he would be guilty of rape or sexual assault in the UK. Also, the crusader for freedom has fled to a regime that is demonstrably un-free.
- doe88 14y agosource?
- gadders 14y agoAssange v Swedish Prosecution Authority [20111 EWHC 2849 (Admin) (02 November 2011) Paragraph 86: "..The allegation is clear and covers the alternatives; it not an allegation that the condom came off accidentally or was damaged accidentally. It would plainly be open to a jury to hold that, if AA had made clear that she would only consent to sexual intercourse if Mr Assange used a condom, then there would be no consent if, without her consent, he did not use a condom, or removed or tore the condom without her consent. His conduct in having sexual intercourse without a condom in circumstances where she had made clear she would only have sexual intercourse if he used a condom would therefore amount to an offence under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, whatever the position may have been prior to that Act." http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- LiveTheDream 14y agoThe UK has asserted[0] that they have a legal basis for arresting Assange even while he is inside the Ecuadorian embassy. They cite the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987; the counterpoint is the Vienna convention and centuries worth of international law. [0] http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/aug/16/julian-assange-ecuador-embassy-asylum http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/aug/16/julian-assange-e...
- peteretep 14y agoMy understanding is that it's a little more nuanced than that: that the UK believes it has the right to withdraw the diplomatic status of the building used for the Ecuadorian embassy. Ecuadorian diplomats would continue to have diplomatic protection, presumably would be given long notice of the requirement to vacate the embassy, and move goods from it... but Mr Assange would not have any of that protection. I'm not sure which part of the Vienna Convention you think this would violate?
- buro9 14y agoI feel hesitant to even speculate on the possibilities, but what if Ecuador made him a diplomat?
- peteretep 14y agoThey can't - he'd have to enter the country on a diplomatic passport. And the UK can refuse diplomatic visas to whomever they want.
- Semaphor 14y agoSomeone further up said the UK could choose to no accept that. No clue why;)
- peteretep 14y agoAlso relevant, from Wikipedia: "Although most persons with diplomatic immunity carry diplomatic passports, having a diplomatic passport is not the equivalent of having diplomatic immunity. A grant of diplomatic status, a privilege of which is diplomatic immunity, has to come from the government of the country in relation to which diplomatic status is claimed. Also, having a diplomatic passport does not mean visa-free travel. A holder of a diplomatic passport must obtain a non-diplomatic visa when traveling to a country where he is not currently nor is going to be accredited as a diplomat, if visas are required to nationals of his country." More frequently, I hear of UK embassies not offering full diplomatic protection to their non-political staff in foreign countries. If you're sending someone from your Tourism Board to the British embassy in Thailand, you simply don't want the hassle of having to specifically revoke his diplomatic privilege when he shows up in Pattaya with a dead hooker, where you're happy to give them diplomatic car plates so the traffic police don't try and get 500THB from them for speeding... I assume this is an international trend, rather than something the Brits thought up.
- jgrahamc 14y agoI strongly doubt that Britain will take sudden action to arrest Assange in the embassy. What's likely to happen now is a stand off where he can't get out of the embassy because he'll be arrested. The UK and Ecuador will try to negotiate some sort of deal where Assange does go to Sweden to be questioned. Given that European states don't have the death penalty Assange would not be extradited to the US if there was a risk of him facing death there. If he leaves he'll be arrested, if he manages to get in a diplomatic car the car will be stopped with Assange in it and there'll be a stand off. If Ecuador tries to make him into a diplomat the UK can simply refuse to accept that he is a diplomat. And if they try to use a diplomatic bag then the UK will claim that it's being used for improper purposes and block it. IMHO Assange is stuck there until a deal is worked out. The granting of asylum is just one step in what will continue to be a tedious soap opera. My interpretation of the letter that the FO sent to Ecuador is as a statement of a negotiating position given that the FO got wind of the fact that he was going to be offered asylum.
- elmindreda 14y agoSweden doesn't have the best of records wrt extraditions in cases where the US has an interest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repatriation_of_Ahmed_Agiza_and_Muhammad_al-Zery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repatriation_of_Ahmed_Agiza_an...
- tarellel 14y agoHe may had been granted asylum, but there's almsot no way they'll be able to get him out of there. And seeing as how it's regarded as the UK is a pet to the US it's highly unlikely there'll be a chance of any trade.
- roc 14y agoCan they not put him in a helicopter with a diplomatic courier or minor embassy functionary and fly him out to a boat in international waters? (Edit: I see now that was already discussed below. nm.) That asked, I tend to agree that the most likely case is that Ecuador is only involved because they want unrelated concessions from the UK and will likely turn him over after some brief negotiations.
- meiji 14y agoObviously he has every right to be paranoid about the US trying to extradite him but you have to wonder how far he's willing to go on this. I think the Assange story long ago eclipsed the Wikileaks story (look how little attention Bradley Manning gets) and if he was prosecuted and convicted of rape in Sweden and had to do jail time there, I think the story would only be remembered for Assange. No need for a very messy public trial after extradition, no need for the miles of bad press it would generate.
- autophil 14y agoThe problem with Assange is while he is courageous, he is also morally weak. It's his utter lack of morals that has given his enemies so much ammunition. I support Assange, although not without reservation, and I refuse to speak out for him in public because of his rape charges (charges which have not been proven). I doubt he will successfully flee the UK. To paraphrase the old Radiohead song, Assange, "you did it to yourself".
- oinksoft 14y agoInnocent until proven guilty? Conspiracy theorists would tell you that there's no surer way to discredit somebody with no real evidence than to publicize a salacious sex story.
- Tyrannosaurs 14y agoThe issue with claiming innocent until proven guilty is that that is one part of a due process which Assange's actions are making impossible to follow. I'm not saying he's guilty (or innocent), just that when you halt due process, terms like this become a little less meaningful as they're one part of a larger thing which is being blocked.
- xutopia 14y agoWhat do you mean morally weak?
- autophil 14y agoIf his motivations were purely based on freedom and the democratization of information, and not on his own physical yearnings, he wouldn't have compromised his mission. Unfortunately, his sexual desires superseded his common sense and that of the greater good.
- hetman 14y agoThis still remains only an allegation. On another note, it's easy to remain on one's moral high horse while surrounded by comfort and taking relatively light responsibility on one self. I suspect the perfect moral hero that gives up all of them selves to protect some perfect ideals is something you're more likely to encounter in fiction like Star Trek than reality.
- 0x0 14y agoHow often do you get see governments threatening to revoke the diplomatic status of an embassy for the sake of apprehending a rape suspect? Wow.
- jgrahamc 14y agoOr, how often do rape suspects having gone through the entire legal system in the UK decide that asking for asylum is the way to go?
- toyg 14y agoHe has not been convicted of anything, in the UK nor in Sweden, so he's not "gone through the entire legal system". The Swedish Police officially wants him for questioning, and for that reason they requested his arrest through Interpol. The UK legal system only argued on whether there's any impediment, under British Law, which would not allow him to be extradited. Under pressure from the current government, Lord Justices ruled that they cannot find anything of the sort. Hardly a trial or "going through the entire legal system".
- jgrahamc 14y ago"He has not been convicted of anything" And I did not say he had. Your entire comment is based on a false premise (that I believed that he had been convicted) that you have invented.
- toyg 14y agoYour entire comment is based on the false premise that he's "gone through the entire legal system". My comment proved that he has only skimmed the surface of extradition law, so he cannot have "gone through the entire legal system". If that were the case, a convicted murderer would have gone through the legal system and... something more? But who cares, he's just a man. The problem here is the sanctity of the asylum principle, which is not worth losing over such a petty dispute.
- dagrz 14y agoWhenever I see a new post about this saga I feel compelled to post this mini documentary about it before everyone gets into the same old arguments. Sex, Lies and Julian Assange http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/07/19/3549280.htm http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/07/19/3549280.ht...
- toyg 14y agoI'm renouncing my Amnesty International-funding credit card on this. The silence on their part, when this charade goes on on their doorstep in London, is deafening. The same goes for LibDems and Labour, but I've given up on them a long time ago (and to be fair, Labour are not even in power). Human/civil rights was just about the last platform where LibDems had a shred of credibility, and now it's shot. To maintain a few perks, they will let the Tories destroy centuries of civilisation - the Vienna Convention is a cornerstone of international relations, and hence, of world peace; threatening it over a silly man is just irresponsible. Craig Murray, former UK Ambassador and old-time LibDem, is just about as shocked as I am, and it's the only reasonable voice I've heard in the last 24 hours: http://pastebin.com/s98KhnYD http://pastebin.com/s98KhnYD Supporting journalists in Belarus, China, Syria, Iran without supporting Assange is not grassroot activism: it's cynical, masqueraded foreign policy.
- gadders 14y agoHuman rights of rape victims? What about those?
- toyg 14y agoEcuadorean diplomats even offered the option to send him to Sweden outright, as long as the Swedish government guarantees he will not be extradited to a third country. Swedish authorities refused. Tell me please: how will Swedish rape victims' human rights be offended by the Swedish inability to ship him to another country? Are Swedish punishment terms not enough?
- tomku 14y agoI don't like this as precedent. If there's one thing we've learned from Wikileaks, it's that evidence of wrongdoing should be out in the open. This is a back-room deal between Assange and Ecuador to give him asylum as protection from a claimed US government conspiracy, but where's the proof? If it's good enough to convince the government of Ecuador, it's good enough to post publicly.
- foobarqux 14y agoThe Wikileaks Grand Jury.
- DividesByZero 14y agoAn angle that seems to be forgotten here is the political bind the UK government finds itself in. On the one hand, they cannot afford to violate territoriality of the Ecuadoran embassy (legally or not) - on the other, they also cannot afford to break the terms of their extradition treaty with Sweden. Either outcome will see the UK have further problems on the world stage, and neither is something they can easily negotiate their way out of. In such a situation, it might be imagined that they would rather risk their reputation with the rest of the world than alienate their allies.
- keithpeter 14y agoYou may be right, but I would be a little concerned about what form those "further problems on the world stage2 might take if I was a UK diplomat, or, worse, a local civilian employee, in a UK embassy somewhere interesting.
- vacri 14y agoIt's not really a bind. They could just as easily say "Sorry, Sweden, he made it to neutral ground" as "we're going to violate the Vienna Convention". At this stage it's all politics; if the UK is threatening to do this, then it's getting something out of the deal.
- Flow 14y agoWhat if Ecuador make him an Ecuadorian diplomat? Somehow I feel that when this is over, he'll return to Australia and make a quick political career and become very influential.
- ceejayoz 14y ago> What if Ecuador make him an Ecuadorian diplomat? England would refuse to grant credentials. > Somehow I feel that when this is over, he'll return to Australia and make a quick political career and become very influential. Given Australia's close ties to the US, that's pretty unlikely.
- vacri 14y agoNo he won't. The Australian public see him as a celebrity, and we don't really do celebrity politicians.
- santiagoIT 14y agoI am ecuadorian and currently live in Ecuador. Granting assylum to Assange is just a PR move from our government. You might not be aware of this, but our 'president' won a lawsuit for US$ 40 Mio against the 'El Universo' newspaper just because an editor wrote an article critizing him. In Ecuador government CENSORSHIP rules. Hopefully Assange can make it to Ecuador and then realizes with the type of people he got involved with and gets out of here. It so WRONG to have our government be depicted as standing for liberty, freedom of speech, by granting assylum to assange. Please do some research. This goverment is all but that!!!!!!
- eternauta3k 14y agoI think taking asylum from Ecuador compromises his integrity. Will Wikileaks publish leaks about Correa in the future?
- wes-exp 14y agoEcuador falls into the same category as the US in the current Press Freedom Index. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index
- jpincheira 14y agoEcuador: "We are not a colony from the UK". EPIC.
- Crake 14y agoYes, I quite enjoyed that bit of snark as well.
- brudgers 14y agoThe British didn't seem quite so committed to extraditing Augusto Pinochet. This despite the fact that he had been indicted for crimes against humanity, not simply wanted for questioning as is the case for Mr. Assange. In the case of Pinochet, there were four extradition requests: Spain, Belgium, Switzerland and France. However, the British government took Mr. Pinochet's frail health into account and ultimately released him. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment_and_arrest_of_Augusto_Pinochet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment_and_arrest_of_August...
- Tyrannosaurs 14y agoAnd many people detest in the UK and detest that decision and the woman who made it. And so what if you make a bad decision historically? Are you suggesting that having made one that's a precedent and we should continue doing the wrong thing? The rights and wrongs of this case aren't determined about mistakes that may or may not have been made in the past.
- barking 14y agoPlease don't downvote, I just can't miss this opportunity to re-tell a joke from the time (Everton, an English football team, had a reputation for being boring to watch). What do Everton and General Pinochet have in common? They both force people into football stadiums and torture them.
- barking 14y agoAre you referring to Maggie Thatcher? She was quite vocal at the time but was long out of office by then
- Tyrannosaurs 14y agoMy mistake. As it was Blair then obviously a decent, honest humanitarian decision... joke
- Tyrannosaurs 14y agoEDIT: It wasn't Mrs. T but I stand by the fact that it wouldn't be a decision that most in the UK would support, whoever made it.
- nsns 14y agoEverything seems so extreme about this saga: a "leaker" is accused of not using contraception (i.e., leaking) in a (possibly) covert plot by the US to subject him to the very same treatment his leaks so shockingly revealed. Then he turns himself into a public target for the US and its allies, thus rendering their actual disregard for human rights and tendency for over-the-top aggressiveness explicit and embarrassing, in a manner which is actually much more effective and public than his site's leaks. A bona fide political circus, in which the main performer, Assange, turns out to be an extremely talented clown.
- debacle 14y agoI don't understand all of these people suggesting that once Assange is in international waters he is somehow safe. The US will just stop the Ecuadoran vessel, board it, and take Assange. We've got historic precedent for their lack of Give a Fuck in situations of this nature.
- chrisacky 14y agoReading down through all of the comments, I can see that people have a totally mixed opinion of how this can happen. Some people think that the US have no intention of wanting to extradite and charge Assange, but Assange and his counsel have repeatedly (in the last month) requested that the US make a statement confirming this. The matter of the fact is, many high profile American's have said that he should be killed, and put to death. Onto the other topic of the rape charges, I think some people don't fully understand the facts surrounding the charge. I didn't either until I spent thirty minutes and read this article: http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/07/19/3549280.htm http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/07/19/3549280.ht... But from this transcript... these are the key points: ------------- The "sexual assault/rape/molestation" charges were filed after two women Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilen went to the police to seek advice if they could compel Assange to take a STD test since they did not use a condom during sex. Both of the women went to the Klara police station in central Stockholm, however, it is mentioned that Ardin had gone along primarily to support Wilen. Ardin had been frequently in the company of Assange. She had previously described him as such a "cool man" (Twitter). They also arrived and left together at a Crayfish party (equivalent of a cocktail party). Ardin was sharing accomodation with Assange and had refused an offer from someone else for temporary accomodation. The day after the accusation of rape and molesation Ardin sent a SMS saying : "I've just spent some time with the coolest people in the world". SMS text messages were also exchanged between Sofia and Ardin, which showed that the two of them knew of the relationship between each other and Assange. Ardin responded to a friend who was looking for Assange : "He's not here. He's planned to have sex with the cashmere girl every evening, but not made it. Maybe he finally found time yesterday?" The Swedish police, totally railroaded the investigation. Interviews have been leaked with Assange, and Wilen commented initially "that she became so distraught she refused to give any more testimony and refused to sign what had been taken down.". Assange went freely for interview to the police station and was released without immediate charge, and was free to travel. Almost immediately there after, another warrant was issued for his arrest. Eventually, it was also upgraded to an Interpol "Red Notice". It's alleged (from the transcripts), that Sweden has frankly always been the United States' lap dog and it's not a matter we are particularly proud of. The Swedish Government has... essentially, whenever a US official says, "Jump", the Sweden Government asks, "How high?" Assange's legal team are clearly trying to point out that US is coercing all of this behind the scenes so that he can then be extradited from Sweden and face trial for conspiracy to commit espionage. > The burden should be on the United States Government to say, "We are not planning to prosecute Julian Assange". If they just gave that assurance, I can guarantee you that Julian Assange would go to Sweden tomorrow. ---------------- This is hugely and unequivocally politically motivated. I'm British, and I am largely ashamed that pressure is not being placed on Sweden by the foreign minister to have them reinvestigate the extradition request. Also, Sweden will, and has previously done all it can to scratch America's back. Assange should stay put, until US says "we will not pursue extradition from Sweden". (Which they will not do.)
- mmaunder 14y agoWhat is really being discussed here, without saying it explicitly, is whether it's OK for the United States to go after it's perceived enemies in other countries, for crimes committed outside the USA that violate USA laws, and bring them home to face trial, whether or not they are US citizens. And lets just call a spade a spade. It's clearly the "United States of Sweden".
- anuraj 14y agoBest wishes to assange in his quest to make the most secretive regimes of the world transparent. Less governments the better! Humanity do not need extra ordinary hijackers, tramplers of human rights and surveillance junkies.
- slurgfest 14y agoLook to Somalia to see how the removal of government opens a power vacuum which creates chaos and ultimately new governments. Unless you have got a sustainable plan for maintaining a vacuum, you can reasonably assume that nature will fill it.
- anuraj 14y agoThe existence of a government do not mean it is desirable. It is an act of authority on people. When people are enlightened and can choose for themselves and govern themselves, the power of governments to arrogate themselves the power shall wither away - but the secretive regimes are fearing just that - they do not want their citizens to be informed or enlightened and are a regressive influence to the progress of humanity.
- antoinevg 14y agoI'm just going to leave this here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroe_Doctrine
- cletus 14y agoI find the points and counterpoints on the Assange issue rather confusing and it's hard for me, as an observer, to separate fact from fiction. I'm wondering if someone can clear up some points: 1. Apparently there is a two-stage interview process in Sweden with criminal investigations. A first interview, which Assange has done, and a second that is equivalent to being charged. Is this true? 2. It has been argued that Swedish authorities have done interviews in embassies and other countries in other cases but have refused to do so here. In those other cases, are they first or second interviews (assuming (1) is correct)? 3. Has the US formally charged, indicated they would charge, sought extradition or otherwise indicated they would seek extradition of Assange or is it merely assumed? 4. Is there any substantive difference in extradition proceedings from the UK or Sweden? The US could seek extradition from the UK. It is argued by Assange's defenders that it is easier from Sweden and a UK judge may well throw out the request as being politically motivated whereas extradition from Sweden, it is argued, can be done politically rather than through the courts. How true is this? 5. Sweden has refused to not extradite Assange, should he return, to the US. How normal is this? Can Sweden legally do this? I know EU countries have, in the past, as a condition of extradition required the US to guarantee that the death penalty won't be sought or applied. I assume in those cases that is a real issue so it seems like there is some room for movement when it comes to extradition; 6. What is the status of Assange's legal proceedings against extradition to Sweden? The High Court has ruled I believe so the only recourse now is the European Court of Human Rights? Is that still ongoing? Can it make a binding ruling against extradition that the UK must abide by? 7. When it comes to criminal charges in any country I'm familiar with there are two things: how the law is written and how it is applied. Many things are illegal that the authorities don't actively pursue. Partially this is simply convention, partially its policing and partially (IMHO) it's holding things in reserve, meaning if you really want to get someone you have something. Is this also the case for Sweden? Given the facts as (publicly) known regarding the rape allegations, how normal is it to seek criminal charges in this case? 8. With regards to political asylum. How normal is it for a country to offer political asylum to someone in another country who is a citizen of a third country resisting extradition to a fourth? Hell, you can probably add "because of fears of being extradited to a fifth"! Assange is an Australian citizen. As an Australian citizen myself I'm disappointed but not at all surprised in the silence of the Australian government on this issue and the apparent acquiescence to US demands. It's often pointed out that citizenship is not only a privilege but a responsibility. The government likewise has a responsibility to defend the interests of its citizens and I see that sadly lacking here.
- lifeguard 14y agoFor perspective, Bradly Manning his under 24 hour gaurd and observation. He must strip nude every morning before his female and male guards. He is allowed no mail. He never sees the sky or breathes fresh air. Some of this is for his protection they say. Assange is wise to fear the wrath of the USA and its special friend the UK.
- lifeguard 14y ago"INTERPOL cannot compel any of its 190 member countries to arrest the subject of a Red Notice. Any individual wanted for arrest should be considered innocent until proven guilty. " http://www.interpol.int/ http://www.interpol.int/
- nacker 14y agoA 1994 study by Dr. Eugene Kanin of Purdue University revealed that 41% of rape allegations are fabrications. The Innocence Project reports that the number one crime for which they release wrongfully convicted individuals from prison is rape. Why are these women not in prison? http://www.register-her.com/index.php?title=Main_Page http://www.register-her.com/index.php?title=Main_Page
- duaneb 14y ago...because there has been nothing but accusations and guilt for any party has not been resolved?
- nacker 14y agoRead the submission guidelines: "Only those submissions that can be corroborated by either a link(s) to a recognized news affiliate and/or digital copies of court records, with correct contact information for that court, or other compelling, substantiated documentation, will be accepted as proof. All submissions based on court records must be verified by our staff before they will be posted. " You want the actual court documents on the site? That is not going to happen.
- HomaSapiens 14y agoActually, his study revealed that a specific police station in a small city determined 45 out of 109 rape allegations filed between 1978 and 1987 were "false." I can think of 45 reasons why (male, politically connected) police in the pre-nineties would make that decision. To be fair, one of those reasons could be because the allegation actually is false. But the common reason is because men don't want the allegations to be true-- as you have demonstrated in these threads, and have the power, unlike yourself, to rubber stamp them away.
- fduran 14y agoA movie script couldn't do better: Assange's lawyer is Baltazar Garzon, the Spanish ex-judge who asked London for the extradition of Pinochet.
- melvinmt 14y agoIs there a particular reason why Assange chose to ask political asylum in Ecuador?
- credo 14y agoSometimes it looks like authoritarian governments can learn a thing or two from "democratic" countries. When Chen Guangcheng sought refuge in the American embassy, the Chinese govt didn't use any trumped up criminal charges against him as an excuse to threaten to invade the American embassy and arrest Mr Chen. Britain is threatening to invade the embassy of Ecuador by using a local 1987 law to revoke the diplomatic status of the embassy. Next time around, the Chinese and every authoritarian govt around the world will know how to handle any asylum seekers in any British embassy in the world.
- leanucci 14y agoThe police should just wait for him at the door, and bust him as he shows up.
- bwilson 14y agoMr. Patiño said his government had made its decision after the authorities in Britain, Sweden and the United States refused to give guarantees that, if Mr. Assange were extradited to Sweden, he would not then be sent on to the United States to face other charges. This is key, and pretty much proves what's going on. They didn't want to take extradition to the US off the table, yet supposedly this is only about answering to rape charges.
- dsirijus 14y agoIn failure to deliver my sentiment in proper wording (and I've scratched the written few times), I'll just quote one of my personal heroes: "The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater." ~ Frank Zappa
- tokenadult 14y agoI agree with this Toronto Globe and Mail editorial on the issue: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/editorials/ecuador-should-not-give-assange-asylum-and-he-should-step-out-and-defend-himself/article4484914/ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/editorials/ecuador... "As for Mr. Assange, he should step out of doors and defend himself."
- dgdg 14y agoWhy are now British authorities are under a binding obligation to extradite him to Sweden, but British Court released V. Antonov on bail when Lithuania asked UK to extradite him to Lithuania?
- gadders 14y agoTo be honest, I think what we have here is a case of cognitive dissonance - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance People admire Assange for what he has done as part of wikileaks, whilst also simultaneously loathing rapists. I felt the same when Mike Tyson was convicted of rape. As a follower of boxing, I was a huge fan of his power and skill. And then he got convicted of rape. I tried to tell myself that it was a fix, the "victim" was after his money etc etc. But now I realise that both things are true. He was one of the best boxers ever, and he did rape that woman. Steve Jobs could be a fantastic businessman and innovator, and a bit of an arsehole to work with. Benjamin Britten could be a great composer and sexually attracted to youg boys. Assange could be a brave "dissident" and sexually taken advantage of those two women.
- vacri 14y agoA bit more information has come to light. A respected broadsheet newspaper here in Australia has requested some diplomatic cables under the Freedom of Information Act and reports that the Australian diplomatic service believes that the US will attempt to extradite Assange. http://www.theage.com.au/national/us-in-pursuit-of-assange-cables-reveal-20120817-24e8u.html http://www.theage.com.au/national/us-in-pursuit-of-assange-c...