5 ms·

Now, if you wanted to argue that the rape charges look strange, because those charges were dismissed at first, both victims do not want to prosecute further, th

Now, if you wanted to argue that the rape charges look strange, because those charges were dismissed at first, both victims do not want to prosecute further, the accussed is kind of a target, so on... well, OK. But your argument here amazes me. Why is it suspicious at all for the Interpol to hunt for a possible rapist? It does for thieves, kidnappers and so on. And it should. I would be surprised and enraged if the Interpol had an arbitrary threshold of violence by which it would decide to act or not, as if they were nobles graciously granting the plebs the gift of international justice. Now, I don't buy that this rape accussations are pretexts. If the U.S. really wanted Assange, why haven't they charged him of espionage, hacking, anything to pressure the U.K. to extradite him? Sweden is now full of U.S.'s lackeys, but the U.K. isn't? Or, shit, just send a CIA agent there and get him on a plane. Wouldn't be the first time that happened.

white_devil 14y ago
> Why is it suspicious at all for the Interpol to hunt for a possible rapist? When does the Interpol ever get involved in a rape case? Especially one where someone is suspected of not-actually-rape -"rape", and supposedly only wanted for "questioning"? What the fuck? Does this not sound suspicious to you at all? > If the U.S. really wanted Assange, why haven't they charged him of espionage, hacking, anything to pressure the U.K. to extradite him? Who knows? Maybe they came up with the bullshit rape charges in Sweden first, before someone thought of doing that? At least at this point, they kind of have to go through Sweden to maintain any tiny shreds of credibility.
- thomasz 14y ago
  Read the article, it answers those questions.
- scott_s 14y ago
  Sweden does not want him for questioning. They want to arrest him for rape.
  - white_devil 14y ago
    Really now? http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/21/julian-assange-defends-decision-sweden http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/21/julian-assange-d... Julian Assange today defended his decision not to return to Sweden for questioning over allegations of sexual assault, saying he did not need to be "at the beck and call of people making allegations". Apparently in 2010, it was for "questioning". It was bullshit then, and it's bullshit now.
- Kell 14y ago
  Interpol is not qualified to judge if what a full member country calls rape is really rape. They received a request from the country, and they charge it (well... they do filter non-serious charges... but this almost never happens to fully respected democracies). And yeah... rape is actually one of those things that Interpol almost always investigate if it's crossborder. It's actually not strange at all... To Interpol, it's rape. Which is considered a very serious crime. Period.
- rprasad 14y ago
  Interpol gets involved in rape cases all the time. Most of them do not make the U.S. papers or otherwise become international news.
CWuestefeld 14y ago
It does for thieves, kidnappers and so on. I think this is the heart of the matter. A couple of months ago my wife's car was robbed. The police did nothing but document the theft for insurance purposes, making no effort to identify or apprehend the criminal. I've no doubt that if my wife was assaulted, they would have made some actual efforts; and had she been killed or raped, they'd have made it a priority. It must be that the authorities have some kind of scale for severity (and locale) of crimes, relating to how much effort they're willing to expend. Minor crimes don't get as much effort. Assange's accused crime is toward the higher end of that scale, but is also somebody else's problem; perhaps foreign police aren't willing to go as far for foreign crimes: would the Swedish police be willing to invest much if my wife's hypothetical assailant were known to be in Sweden? The OP's point seems to hinge on this logic, which really does seem to be the way these thinks work. What we don't know is how the Swedish authorities (or any others) would rank the accused crimes in their table of "how much resources do we commit?".
- e12e 14y ago
  We might: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/post_1435_b_797188.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/post_1435_b_797188....

white_devil 14y ago

> Why is it suspicious at all for the Interpol to hunt for a possible rapist? When does the Interpol ever get involved in a rape case? Especially one where someone is suspected of not-actually-rape -"rape", and supposedly only wanted for "questioning"? What the fuck? Does this not sound suspicious to you at all? > If the U.S. really wanted Assange, why haven't they charged him of espionage, hacking, anything to pressure the U.K. to extradite him? Who knows? Maybe they came up with the bullshit rape charges in Sweden first, before someone thought of doing that? At least at this point, they kind of have to go through Sweden to maintain any tiny shreds of credibility.

thomasz 14y ago
Read the article, it answers those questions.
scott_s 14y ago
Sweden does not want him for questioning. They want to arrest him for rape.
- white_devil 14y ago
  Really now? http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/21/julian-assange-defends-decision-sweden http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/21/julian-assange-d... Julian Assange today defended his decision not to return to Sweden for questioning over allegations of sexual assault, saying he did not need to be "at the beck and call of people making allegations". Apparently in 2010, it was for "questioning". It was bullshit then, and it's bullshit now.
Kell 14y ago
Interpol is not qualified to judge if what a full member country calls rape is really rape. They received a request from the country, and they charge it (well... they do filter non-serious charges... but this almost never happens to fully respected democracies). And yeah... rape is actually one of those things that Interpol almost always investigate if it's crossborder. It's actually not strange at all... To Interpol, it's rape. Which is considered a very serious crime. Period.
rprasad 14y ago
Interpol gets involved in rape cases all the time. Most of them do not make the U.S. papers or otherwise become international news.

CWuestefeld 14y ago

It does for thieves, kidnappers and so on. I think this is the heart of the matter. A couple of months ago my wife's car was robbed. The police did nothing but document the theft for insurance purposes, making no effort to identify or apprehend the criminal. I've no doubt that if my wife was assaulted, they would have made some actual efforts; and had she been killed or raped, they'd have made it a priority. It must be that the authorities have some kind of scale for severity (and locale) of crimes, relating to how much effort they're willing to expend. Minor crimes don't get as much effort. Assange's accused crime is toward the higher end of that scale, but is also somebody else's problem; perhaps foreign police aren't willing to go as far for foreign crimes: would the Swedish police be willing to invest much if my wife's hypothetical assailant were known to be in Sweden? The OP's point seems to hinge on this logic, which really does seem to be the way these thinks work. What we don't know is how the Swedish authorities (or any others) would rank the accused crimes in their table of "how much resources do we commit?".

e12e 14y ago
We might: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/post_1435_b_797188.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/post_1435_b_797188....