You have to see it from the governments point of view. They see him having any sex as a crime because they don't want him to reproduce.
-- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed H
Re:"Sex crimes"
by
shop+S+Mart
·
· Score: 5, Informative
lol no
QFTA
"The investigation stems from separate encounters Assange had with two women during his August visit to Sweden, where he was applying for Swedish residency and attempting to secure the protection of Swedish free-press laws for his secret-spilling website. According to local news reports, the women told investigators the sexual encounters began as consensual, but turned non-consensual. One woman said Assange ignored her appeals to stop when the condom broke."
Well for one thing, when one considers some recent judgments relating to copyright law in Sweden they can have the impression that it has become the lap dog of the United States.
Assange seems entirely willing to be interviewed, just not in person for fear of getting a bullet in the head on his way to the courthouse.
The funny thing is how the U.S. and other countries think smearing Assange like this is going to do anything other than make him out to be a martyr... he'll be replaced just as quickly as he disappears.
Re:"Sex crimes"
by
MoonBuggy
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
If he really was innocent why wouldn't he talk to the authorities?
I'm not saying he is innocent - I don't think we have enough information to decide in either direction, although the manner in which the initial warrant was produced, then voided, then reproduced does seem a little sketchy - but he has perfectly good reason to be wary of hopping on a plane and putting himself in the hands of the police. It's by no means unreasonable for him to believe he'd find himself thrown in a cell somewhere in the custody of someone he's pissed off. The US, for instance, want him on espionage charges - apparently they're unlikely to stick, but for someone who's caused as much embarrassment as Assange I can quite easily see this resulting in two or three years in a cell while they come to a conclusion one way or another.
All that said, though, he's courted publicity and then gone into hiding, which I'd say is a bad move. Either rely on anonymity or on your high profile - you can't have it both ways. As the Guardian article mentions, there are many (myself included) who think that on balance he'd be better off facing his accusation in as public a forum as he can make.
Re:"Sex crimes"
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 5, Funny
One woman said Assange ignored her appeals to stop when the condom broke.
You could say she was afraid of his wiki leaking.
Re:"Sex crimes"
by
Jah-Wren+Ryel
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
One woman said Assange ignored her appeals to stop when the condom broke.
I'd like to hear a better explanation for that one. Maybe all the girls I've been with have been completely out of touch with their bodies, but there is no way any of them could tell if the condom broke until afterwards.
-- When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Re:"Sex crimes"
by
Charliemopps
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Wait what? This happened TWICE while he was in Sweden? Was it 2 women in a single encounter? Or 2 women at separate times? How huge is this mans penis that he's breaking condoms left and right? And how on earth is this even remotely provable? "Hey, we were having consensual sex and half way through I changed my mind. Throw that guy in jail!" Finally, they charge him 2 DAYS AFTER HE RELEASES THE LARGEST GOVERNMENT LEAK IN HISTORY?!?!? Is that not even remotely fishy?
I HATE Conspiracy theories, but this is just a little to ridiculous for even me to fall for.
Re:"Sex crimes"
by
Ihmhi
·
· Score: 4, Informative
make him out to be a martyr... he'll be replaced just as quickly as he disappears.
What makes you so sure about that? I bet once Assange goes down, WikiLeaks follows soon after. There are not very many people with the financial means to stay on the run all the time. Among those who do exist, how many of them want to compromise their comfy lifestyle by pissing off powerful interests?
Assange is not some drug dealer pushing crack on the corner. He is not some kid swapping pirated movies and music. There are not legions of people doing what he does who will just step up and keep it going if he disappears.
Assange alone is not Wikileaks. As I've already said it's run by a council of 5 anonymous people (who we can safely assume Assange is a member, along with his spokesperson duties) and nearly a thousand volunteers. If he disappeared, died, etc. there's other people to continue the mission.
Out of curiousity...
by
g4c
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
How often does Interpol get involved in sex crimes cases? Specifically, I'm wondering if this is common practice, or if it's only common practice when the suspect is as famous/meddling/troublesome-to-xyz-government as Julian Assange.
Re:Out of curiousity...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
You can tell from the progress against human trafficking... rare to never.
Re:Out of curiousity...
by
SilverHatHacker
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
That's exactly what I was wondering. According to Wikipedia, Interpol:
focuses primarily on public safety, terrorism, organized crime, crimes against humanity, environmental crime, genocide, war crimes, piracy, illicit drug production, drug trafficking, weapons smuggling, human trafficking, money laundering, child pornography, white-collar crime, computer crime, intellectual property crime and corruption.
Seems a little below their level, unless it falls under public safety or crimes against humanity?
-- Funny may not give karma, but +5 Informative never made anyone snort coffee out their nose.
Re:Out of curiousity...
by
chrb
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Good question. The whole situation is very unusual. Even if you assume that Assange did suddenly decide, during consensual sex, to carry out a non-consensual act, the issue of prosecution is on shaky ground. The vast majority of rape accusations never make it to court, and the vast majority of those are found "not guilty" (the figure is something like 95% of accused either do not get to court, or walk away free). For a successful prosecution there has to be more evidence than "she says she didn't consent, he says she did". The whole legal issue of being able to predicate consent and retroactively withdraw consent (e.g. consent based on unstated predicate of shared ethnicity) is fraught with difficulties for a successful prosecution. For a prosecutor to pursue a case, based only on the allegation, is unusual enough. For a prosecutor to issue a request for Interpol intervention, with a view to extraditing a foreigner from a 3rd party country, is highly unusual. For a prosecutor to do this, after the Chief Prosecutor has already stated that the alleged suspect is "no longer wanted" and "is not suspected of rape" and is free to leave the country, is very odd indeed.
Note also that the Interpol notice is apparently not an international arrest warrant - it is just a request for information: "The Interpol notice is not an international arrest warrant but the public is asked to contact police with any information about Mr Assange's whereabouts.". Putting out such a notice is bizarre, given that the Prosecutor is in contact with Assange's legal counsel in London, and that Assange has agreed to meet at either the Swedish Embassy or Scotland Yard. The prosecutor wants "more information" about him, but is already in contact, and can arrange a meeting in person or via video conference at the headquarters of the Metropolitan Police in London, but instead chooses the Interpol route? This is not normal for a sex crimes case with only alleged victim testimony and no other evidence. If you or I had unprotected sex with a girl, and she subsequently said her consent had been predicated on use of a condom, the case would never go to court. Certainly it would never become an international police issue. There is the issue of there maybe being two alleged victims, but apparently only one actually complained to the police? I guess we will find out what really happened - if the case ever makes it to court.
Re:Out of curiousity...
by
dave562
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
The scope / context of the crime is different. If you read the list again, you will realize that all of those crimes involve large numbers of victims. They are also large scale crimes that have a lot of moving parts and are multi-faceted.
While rape is a serious crime, it is not something that falls within the scope of Interpol's jurisdiction.
There's a difference between not treating women with respect and raping them.
-- Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
I applaud Assange
by
bogaboga
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
One thing I respect that dude for, is his ambition. Not even the 'strongest' nation on earth could derail him. Think about that for a second.
A quote I remember in one interview he had with the BBC...
"I get personal satisfaction when I expose what governments have denied the citizens they represent and will continue to do so till the very end."
This dude is one hell of a dude. I wonder what governments really fear if all they are doing is 'doing good' as they say.
One thing for sure: We now know what many governments were thinking despite the public rhetoric. I personally cannot wait for the financial documents to be exposed. My hunch...BoA.
Re:I applaud Assange
by
offrdbandit
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Our Justice Department is lead by a cowardly ideologue.
Re:I applaud Assange
by
Darkness404
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I applaud the government for not going after Assange. Any remotely free government should have first off released all the info that Assange has released first off, and secondly should admit to being wrong when it does break out. The only person that should be punished should be the US government.
Spreading rumors of sexual crime (predator, pedo, deviancy, etc.) is standard policy against street people and homeless people. Any question about a new homeless person, asked of any ten other homeless people, will usually attract one to four respondants,"Don't know who that person is. I heard they might be a sex offender. $So_and_so said they heard that there are some new pedophiles around." It is nearly standard policy to run the pedo/predator line against any new people on the street and, if they so much as bat an eye, run them down with it.
Julian Assange is free to have a beer with me on the sidewalk any day! I'll even buy.
-- the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
The incidents *supposedly* occurred in August. But the women in question didn't turn up at the police station until a week after he released his first batch of Iraq War leaks. I'm sure the timing was just a coincidence, of course.
-- SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
could be dangerous
by
cool_arrow
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I'll bet even money that if they throw him in a cell that he unexpectedly and mysteriously hangs himself when nobody is looking.;D
This is scary
by
Post-O-Matron
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Got modded Troll for saying this which I'm not sure why.
Anyway I think the chances of these accusations against Assange being completely unrelated to the leak and the timing being coincidental are pretty slim. It's kinda obvious that higher powers have targetted him. It's even more scary because it seems that these days the easiest way to hurt someone is by accusations of sexual assault. Who would dare hint that it might be untrue? I mean even on Slashdot one gets modded down -1 as Troll for raising this option...
Here's a quote from the article:
According to local news reports, the women told investigators the sexual encounters began as consensual, but turned non-consensual. One woman said Assange ignored her appeals to stop when the condom broke.
I don't understand - the condom broke in the middle so she asked him to stop, he didn't - and that's rape?
Re:This is scary
by
euphemistic
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I don't understand - the condom broke in the middle so she asked him to stop, he didn't - and that's rape?
Yes. If anyone in the middle of sexual intercourse says stop, you have to stop. If you choose to disregard this direct request, it's rape or at the very least sexual assault - no matter what point during intercourse it happens.
Anyway, I have no clue whether these things happened or not, all I know is that Assange is in a world of trouble regardless. He has chosen one dangerous road.
Re:This is scary
by
koreaman
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
It's the other way around actually..
by
MRe_nl
·
· Score: 5, Informative
In a statement earlier this month, Assange’s British counsel said that his client repeatedly offered to cooperate with local investigators while he was in Sweden, and has offered to answer questions remotely from Britain since then.
“All of these offers have been flatly refused by a prosecutor who is abusing her powers by insisting that he return to Sweden at his own expense to be subjected to another media circus that she will orchestrate,” wrote attorney Mark Stephens. “Pursuing a warrant in this circumstance is entirely unnecessary and disproportionate.
--
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
Re:It's the other way around actually..
by
GNUALMAFUERTE
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Are you kidding me? One of them is a right-wing feminist (yeah, weird) who has been outspoken about how woman should use rape accusations to destroy man.
This is the US trying to bring him down with its usual tactics. Next is a bullet in the head, like they used to do in the good old days before the media become their best weapon.
-- WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Re:It's the other way around actually..
by
Lehk228
·
· Score: 5, Informative
he didn't evade anything, he was allowed to leave, and now after the fact the prosecutor is demanding that he return to sweden
-- Snowden and Manning are heroes.
Re:It's the other way around actually..
by
Per+Wigren
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Are you kidding me? One of them is a right-wing feminist (yeah, weird) who has been outspoken about how woman should use rape accusations to destroy man.
Unless you have a source, you should not post unverified information like that.
Here you have her seven step model for legal revenge blog post, translated from Swedish by Google Translate. She deleted it when the media circus started but because there were so many ways to find it anyway (Google cache, way back machine, cached RSS-feeds etc) she "undeleted" the post after a while.
-- My other account has a 3-digit UID.
What the fuck?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Why is this story filled with assinine comments like this?
Did you miss the part where Assange offered, through his lawyer, several times, to be interviewed by these prosecutors before he had left Sweden? And they weren't interested?
There's no reason for them to go after him now, other than this:
Wikileaks is releasing lots of shit that makes governments around the world look bad, and they apparently feel the need to DISTRACT PEOPLE with these trumped-up "sex" crime accusations, and try to smear Assange any way they can.
Re:What the fuck?
by
chrb
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Or him leaving the country after having been told to keep in contact with the Swedish authorities?
The prosecutor told Assange's lawyer that there was no warrant for Assange's arrest, and that he was free to leave the country without questioning. Assange did nothing wrong in this regard.
Re:What the fuck?
by
Aldenissin
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Yea, convenient that in the middle of all of this data being released, they want to limit a man that travels extensively to do what he does to one country.
-- Like a city whose walls are broken down is a man who lacks self-control.
Re:Where are the espionage charges?
by
g4c
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
The way I see it, governments kill all kinds of people directly and indirectly in secret--and the U.S. has a particularly rich history of this. As such, I want every government's secrets to be plastered everywhere. The number of people that may conceivably die as a result of these leaks is absolutely nothing compared to what has been done in secret for decades.
Of course, I'm a pacifist and an anarchist, so I consider the idea of having to balance secrecy and disclosure so that the state can continue to exist in its preferred form (I believe it's called "national security") kind of moot. YMMV.
Well, that answers the question of Sweden being the US stooge.
I was gonna write "our stooge", but I'm ambivalent on this one, as I am ambivalent about the disclosure of secret diplomatic cables.
Assange might be an asshole, but I want this guy protected.
-- Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat.
Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
I wonder if it was the bankers?
by
erroneus
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
It's one thing to poke at governments. No one is ever happy with their government. In fact, it's pretty standard to have something bad to say about government and it all gets washed away and forgotten in a short time because there's always a fresh new stink pile being created to distract us from the previous stink pile we all got pissed off about. It's almost fun at times. But when Wikileaks says it is releasing secret data from banks? Well, THOSE are the people who run this planet. There are no election turn-overs or parties to choose from. It's just a bunch of men in dark suits controlling the money supply for the whole world. I think it's about time Assange seeks asylum in China. The bankers are a LOT more serious than governments and politics.
Re:Legit?
by
whereiswaldo
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
If he wanted a long, heathy and happy life, he could've remained in obscurity like all of us. I doubt that's his goal.
There's a lot of ways to look at these leaks, and one of them is a wake up call to the people of the world of what goes on and how things are run (it's a lot more "high school" than I ever would have guessed).
Things need to change.
He's convenient now, an Enemy
by
Steeltoe
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Naw, this is blown out of proportion. He might disappear though, to be on the safe side. It's rather ridiculous, like a book, like "1984" by George Orwell, or something like that, but there you have it.
In 20 years, we will hear he's died from natural causes and went mad in the last years, like Fischer.
In the meanwhile, he can serve as our society's Enemy. It's convenient for authorities to create such Enemies, like Obama Bin Laden. They don't really exist, because in reality they are not that powerful as our Overlords, but they're very convenient for them to divert our attention to something that is not really important.
Oh look, someone's alleged of sex-abuse. They've not charged him, since both the girls rather enjoyed it, but they still wanna question him, just not when he agrees to it.
Worse, they're encounters that were consensual then turned non-consensual later when the women he was sleeping with met each other. Which is why the charges were completely dropped at one point as it turned out that you can't declare sex rape ex post facto, it's either rape at the time or it's not. It's not like one of those corner cases where somebody's not able to consent for one reason or another.
If you can have sex with two women who will later regret it, can I kill a few hundred thousand Muslims and take a big hairy shit on the Constitution and International Law? Awesome!
Oh, wait, those two things are probably not on par, are they? Tell you what... I'll throw in the complete destruction of your civil liberties, and you can have some self righteous celebrity gossip egged on by the establishment.
It's a deal? Awesome!
Re:Julian Paul Assange = founder of WikiLeaks
by
fyngyrz
·
· Score: 4, Funny
We can't really hate them for bowing to pressure from the most powerful country in the world.
What a fascinating case this whole Wikileaks thing has become. While the leaks themselves have really been a lot more heat than light, the most interesting thing about this has been the repercussions around the world. The same way a bat squeaks and then gets a picture of the shape and size of his cave by the echoes, the perturbations created by the Wikileaks announcement (even moreso than the leaks themselves) is really giving us a picture of world, where the power lies, and who dances to whose tune.
It's going to be even more interesting when Wikileaks starts releasing corporate leaks. If it serves to enlighten people that corporations have become the de facto world government for at least the last twenty years, then the leaks will have been the most important journalistic product in my lifetime. If they help people understand that we are living in a post-government, post-sovereignty world where the corporation is the only meaningful power (and help people act accordingly) then 20 years from now, we will look back at Wikileaks as the most important development in the history of the Internet.
Or, we'll look back as Wikileaks being the end of the Internet.
By the way, does Wikileaks change anybody's mind on the importance of Net Neutrality? Does anyone think that Wikileaks would ever exist in AT&T's Internet? Or in Apple's Internet? Or in Comcast's Internet? The jury is still out on Google, but I don't see any of the big companies that are opposed to net neutrality really having room for Wikileaks in their universe. Anyway, interesting times...
-- You are welcome on my lawn.
How about Switzerland
by
DreamMaster
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Maybe he should move to Switzerland. If the example set by Roman Polanski.is anything to go by, the country's a haven for accused sex offenders.
We can't really hate them for bowing to pressure from the most powerful country in the world.
China is involved now?
Re:Bullshit
by
protektor
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Actually in the latest round of releases he did exactly that. He and the newspapers asked the US government what names they needed protected, and those names were blacked out. Even the newspapers have reported that some names were blacked out to protect them. So please stop spreading false information.
My guess is the former and watch as he might mysterisouly be transferred to the US to be tried for American crimes on disclosing secrets.
Put the tinfoil hat away. Nobody has ever been successfully prosecuted in the United States for publishing secret material. The number of such prosecutions can be counted on two hands. All the case law on the matter comes down AGAINST being able to prosecute the publisher of such information.
The crime was committed when the information was leaked by someone with a duty to keep it secret, not when a third party published said information. This doesn't make Mr. Assange any less of an asshat but I would not be overly worried about an American criminal prosecution for his activities.
-- I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man. We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Which means a couple of things: the Japanese need to learn that the harming of marine wildlife is NOT a party. And iguanas should not be given anything rectally. But most importantly, the anagrams show that Julian Paul Assange is obviously a CIA agent.
-- intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
He was in Sweden and prosecution waited until he left Sweden to start making demands. Probably specifically to get Interpol involved and limit his movements. You knew this guy was going to get nailed for what he was doing. This is the beginning. Paint him as a child molester because nobody feels bad for one of those. A classic first step. Limit his movements, deny him places to be. Eventually he'll wind up somewhere with an extradition treaty and that will be that.
if the police strongly suspect a person is guilty of a crime but are unable to prove it, it's ok for them to go searching for something else to convict that person of instead?
That's a rather humorous misunderstanding of what I said, and how Capone's conviction took place.
It's more like they tried to collect evidence to convict him on murder and bootlegging charges, and when they looked at the evidence they'd collected realized that they could prove tax evasion.
It's not as if they said 'Well, we have no evidence for murder, start looking for the next thing on the list, we'll get him eventually.' Tax evasion came up after they'd already collected the evidence that proved he was guilty of tax evasion in the course of their existing investigation.
This is standard operating procedure for police organizations and prosecuting attorneys throughout the US. "What can we prove with the evidence we have?" So long as the evidence is collected legally (warrants and such), what is wrong with this? They weren't trolling random citizens for evidence of crimes, they found evidence of other crimes committed by someone they already had good reason to investigate.
Which means that if the police set their minds to it, they could convict anyone they wanted.
This is already a fact of reality. What stops it from happening is that they generally have to have a reason to carry out the initial investigation (see 4th amendment).
Re:Bullshit
by
michelcolman
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
That's quite incredible. I agree that, if a girl asks you to stop, even if you're five seconds from orgasm, you should stop, and you are an asshole if you continue anyway. However, equating this situation (you are already having consensual sex, and you just keep going a bit longer than she wants) to an actual rape (she really never wanted to have sex with you at all) is pushing politcal correctness a bit too far.
When a girl is actually raped (forced to have sex with someone she never wanted to have sex with in the first place), this can be an extremely traumatizing experience. Merely being forced to continue a sexual act you have already engaged in, is more on the level of "being forced to do something you do not want to do" without all the "oh my god he's touching my vagina" feelings associated with a real rape.
Both are bad, but I think it's quite obvious that a real rape is orders of magnitude more serious, and punishment should be adjusted accordingly.
I expect more of /. :(
by
Builder
·
· Score: 5, Informative
I've read through all of the comments on here, and I'm really sad. I don't visit here for up to date news, I can get that elsewhere; I come here for the discussions. But so many of the commenters here are scarily uninformed. And where they're not informed, many of them seem poisoned.
This is a geek site - we're supposed to be able to view information objectively and without being tainted by unrelated information. This reads more like a political forum:(
Firstly, these accusations stem from months ago, so this has nothing to do with the most leak. Sweden have been pursuing the interviews and warrants for a number of weeks now.
Secondly, what's with all of the conspiracy nuts here ? Why is everyone second guessing his reasons for not wanting to go in and talk to the police ?
He offered to go in repeatedly when he was still in the country. When his residence claim was denied, he asked if there was any reason he had to stay in the country and he was told that he was free to leave. So he did. Now he's in another country, and he's _still_ offering to talk to them but he's not prepared to schlepp back there - that's not unreasonable, is it?
Re:Julian Paul Assange = founder of WikiLeaks
by
rwa2
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Oh, I bet Julian Assange fully expects to be martyred "for the cause" at some point. He probably has some interesting "dead man's switch" set up to do something amusing after he goes... if it could make some point about how the world isn't ready for transparency then so much the better.
If these things don't go through WikiLeaks, they'd just go through something else. Hey, maybe his dead man's switch unleashes some sort of decentralized P2P leak site:P
Just in case some reads the comments and not the article..
The women themselves said they were not afraid of him, and he did not force them.
How often does Interpol get involved in sex crimes cases? Specifically, I'm wondering if this is common practice, or if it's only common practice when the suspect is as famous/meddling/troublesome-to-xyz-government as Julian Assange.
There's a difference between not treating women with respect and raping them.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
One thing I respect that dude for, is his ambition. Not even the 'strongest' nation on earth could derail him. Think about that for a second.
A quote I remember in one interview he had with the BBC...
"I get personal satisfaction when I expose what governments have denied the citizens they represent and will continue to do so till the very end."
This dude is one hell of a dude. I wonder what governments really fear if all they are doing is 'doing good' as they say.
One thing for sure: We now know what many governments were thinking despite the public rhetoric. I personally cannot wait for the financial documents to be exposed. My hunch...BoA.
Spreading rumors of sexual crime (predator, pedo, deviancy, etc.) is standard policy against street people and homeless people. Any question about a new homeless person, asked of any ten other homeless people, will usually attract one to four respondants,"Don't know who that person is. I heard they might be a sex offender. $So_and_so said they heard that there are some new pedophiles around." It is nearly standard policy to run the pedo/predator line against any new people on the street and, if they so much as bat an eye, run them down with it.
Julian Assange is free to have a beer with me on the sidewalk any day! I'll even buy.
the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
I'll bet even money that if they throw him in a cell that he unexpectedly and mysteriously hangs himself when nobody is looking. ;D
Got modded Troll for saying this which I'm not sure why.
Anyway I think the chances of these accusations against Assange being completely unrelated to the leak and the timing being coincidental are pretty slim. It's kinda obvious that higher powers have targetted him. It's even more scary because it seems that these days the easiest way to hurt someone is by accusations of sexual assault. Who would dare hint that it might be untrue? I mean even on Slashdot one gets modded down -1 as Troll for raising this option...
Here's a quote from the article:
According to local news reports, the women told investigators the sexual encounters began as consensual, but turned non-consensual. One woman said Assange ignored her appeals to stop when the condom broke.
I don't understand - the condom broke in the middle so she asked him to stop, he didn't - and that's rape?
In a statement earlier this month, Assange’s British counsel said that his client repeatedly offered to cooperate with local investigators while he was in Sweden, and has offered to answer questions remotely from Britain since then.
“All of these offers have been flatly refused by a prosecutor who is abusing her powers by insisting that he return to Sweden at his own expense to be subjected to another media circus that she will orchestrate,” wrote attorney Mark Stephens. “Pursuing a warrant in this circumstance is entirely unnecessary and disproportionate.
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
Why is this story filled with assinine comments like this?
Did you miss the part where Assange offered, through his lawyer, several times, to be interviewed by these prosecutors before he had left Sweden? And they weren't interested?
There's no reason for them to go after him now, other than this:
Wikileaks is releasing lots of shit that makes governments around the world look bad, and they apparently feel the need to DISTRACT PEOPLE with these trumped-up "sex" crime accusations, and try to smear Assange any way they can.
The way I see it, governments kill all kinds of people directly and indirectly in secret--and the U.S. has a particularly rich history of this. As such, I want every government's secrets to be plastered everywhere. The number of people that may conceivably die as a result of these leaks is absolutely nothing compared to what has been done in secret for decades. Of course, I'm a pacifist and an anarchist, so I consider the idea of having to balance secrecy and disclosure so that the state can continue to exist in its preferred form (I believe it's called "national security") kind of moot. YMMV.
Well, that answers the question of Sweden being the US stooge.
I was gonna write "our stooge", but I'm ambivalent on this one, as I am ambivalent about the disclosure of secret diplomatic cables.
Assange might be an asshole, but I want this guy protected.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
It's one thing to poke at governments. No one is ever happy with their government. In fact, it's pretty standard to have something bad to say about government and it all gets washed away and forgotten in a short time because there's always a fresh new stink pile being created to distract us from the previous stink pile we all got pissed off about. It's almost fun at times. But when Wikileaks says it is releasing secret data from banks? Well, THOSE are the people who run this planet. There are no election turn-overs or parties to choose from. It's just a bunch of men in dark suits controlling the money supply for the whole world. I think it's about time Assange seeks asylum in China. The bankers are a LOT more serious than governments and politics.
If he wanted a long, heathy and happy life, he could've remained in obscurity like all of us. I doubt that's his goal.
There's a lot of ways to look at these leaks, and one of them is a wake up call to the people of the world of what goes on and how things are run (it's a lot more "high school" than I ever would have guessed).
Things need to change.
Naw, this is blown out of proportion. He might disappear though, to be on the safe side. It's rather ridiculous, like a book, like "1984" by George Orwell, or something like that, but there you have it.
In 20 years, we will hear he's died from natural causes and went mad in the last years, like Fischer.
In the meanwhile, he can serve as our society's Enemy. It's convenient for authorities to create such Enemies, like Obama Bin Laden. They don't really exist, because in reality they are not that powerful as our Overlords, but they're very convenient for them to divert our attention to something that is not really important.
Oh look, someone's alleged of sex-abuse. They've not charged him, since both the girls rather enjoyed it, but they still wanna question him, just not when he agrees to it.
Something is very very rotten here..
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
Remember the start of dear old Interpol. It was founded as an organized escape aid for upper echelon Nazis during WWII.
In 1923. Learn to causality.
Worse, they're encounters that were consensual then turned non-consensual later when the women he was sleeping with met each other. Which is why the charges were completely dropped at one point as it turned out that you can't declare sex rape ex post facto, it's either rape at the time or it's not. It's not like one of those corner cases where somebody's not able to consent for one reason or another.
If you can have sex with two women who will later regret it, can I kill a few hundred thousand Muslims and take a big hairy shit on the Constitution and International Law? Awesome!
Oh, wait, those two things are probably not on par, are they? Tell you what... I'll throw in the complete destruction of your civil liberties, and you can have some self righteous celebrity gossip egged on by the establishment.
It's a deal? Awesome!
$20. Unless you want something unusual.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
he doesn't directly editorialise
Sure, "Collateral Murder" is a nice, neutral name.
We can't really hate them for bowing to pressure from the most powerful country in the world.
What a fascinating case this whole Wikileaks thing has become. While the leaks themselves have really been a lot more heat than light, the most interesting thing about this has been the repercussions around the world. The same way a bat squeaks and then gets a picture of the shape and size of his cave by the echoes, the perturbations created by the Wikileaks announcement (even moreso than the leaks themselves) is really giving us a picture of world, where the power lies, and who dances to whose tune.
It's going to be even more interesting when Wikileaks starts releasing corporate leaks. If it serves to enlighten people that corporations have become the de facto world government for at least the last twenty years, then the leaks will have been the most important journalistic product in my lifetime. If they help people understand that we are living in a post-government, post-sovereignty world where the corporation is the only meaningful power (and help people act accordingly) then 20 years from now, we will look back at Wikileaks as the most important development in the history of the Internet.
Or, we'll look back as Wikileaks being the end of the Internet.
By the way, does Wikileaks change anybody's mind on the importance of Net Neutrality? Does anyone think that Wikileaks would ever exist in AT&T's Internet? Or in Apple's Internet? Or in Comcast's Internet? The jury is still out on Google, but I don't see any of the big companies that are opposed to net neutrality really having room for Wikileaks in their universe. Anyway, interesting times...
You are welcome on my lawn.
Maybe he should move to Switzerland. If the example set by Roman Polanski.is anything to go by, the country's a haven for accused sex offenders.
We can't really hate them for bowing to pressure from the most powerful country in the world.
China is involved now?
Actually in the latest round of releases he did exactly that. He and the newspapers asked the US government what names they needed protected, and those names were blacked out. Even the newspapers have reported that some names were blacked out to protect them. So please stop spreading false information.
My guess is the former and watch as he might mysterisouly be transferred to the US to be tried for American crimes on disclosing secrets.
Put the tinfoil hat away. Nobody has ever been successfully prosecuted in the United States for publishing secret material. The number of such prosecutions can be counted on two hands. All the case law on the matter comes down AGAINST being able to prosecute the publisher of such information.
The crime was committed when the information was leaked by someone with a duty to keep it secret, not when a third party published said information. This doesn't make Mr. Assange any less of an asshat but I would not be overly worried about an American criminal prosecution for his activities.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
is an anagram for
Iguanas Anal Juleps
and
Japans Sealing Luau
Which means a couple of things: the Japanese need to learn that the harming of marine wildlife is NOT a party. And iguanas should not be given anything rectally. But most importantly, the anagrams show that Julian Paul Assange is obviously a CIA agent.
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
How do you feel about Hillary Clinton ordering illegal spying on the Secretary General of the United Nations?
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
Sure, "Collateral Murder" is a nice, neutral name.
Yeah, it should have just been "murder".
How would you feel if some other country was killing your relatives and neighbors, for any reason whatsoever?
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
He was in Sweden and prosecution waited until he left Sweden to start making demands. Probably specifically to get Interpol involved and limit his movements. You knew this guy was going to get nailed for what he was doing. This is the beginning. Paint him as a child molester because nobody feels bad for one of those. A classic first step. Limit his movements, deny him places to be. Eventually he'll wind up somewhere with an extradition treaty and that will be that.
Also, if there are any Interpol people who happen to read this - I know of an actual child molester you could go pick up pretty easy if this is the sort of thing that actually interests you.
No? Not interested? Hypocrisy. Imagine that.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
if the police strongly suspect a person is guilty of a crime but are unable to prove it, it's ok for them to go searching for something else to convict that person of instead?
That's a rather humorous misunderstanding of what I said, and how Capone's conviction took place.
It's more like they tried to collect evidence to convict him on murder and bootlegging charges, and when they looked at the evidence they'd collected realized that they could prove tax evasion.
It's not as if they said 'Well, we have no evidence for murder, start looking for the next thing on the list, we'll get him eventually.' Tax evasion came up after they'd already collected the evidence that proved he was guilty of tax evasion in the course of their existing investigation.
This is standard operating procedure for police organizations and prosecuting attorneys throughout the US. "What can we prove with the evidence we have?" So long as the evidence is collected legally (warrants and such), what is wrong with this? They weren't trolling random citizens for evidence of crimes, they found evidence of other crimes committed by someone they already had good reason to investigate.
Which means that if the police set their minds to it, they could convict anyone they wanted.
This is already a fact of reality. What stops it from happening is that they generally have to have a reason to carry out the initial investigation (see 4th amendment).
That's quite incredible. I agree that, if a girl asks you to stop, even if you're five seconds from orgasm, you should stop, and you are an asshole if you continue anyway. However, equating this situation (you are already having consensual sex, and you just keep going a bit longer than she wants) to an actual rape (she really never wanted to have sex with you at all) is pushing politcal correctness a bit too far.
When a girl is actually raped (forced to have sex with someone she never wanted to have sex with in the first place), this can be an extremely traumatizing experience. Merely being forced to continue a sexual act you have already engaged in, is more on the level of "being forced to do something you do not want to do" without all the "oh my god he's touching my vagina" feelings associated with a real rape.
Both are bad, but I think it's quite obvious that a real rape is orders of magnitude more serious, and punishment should be adjusted accordingly.
I've read through all of the comments on here, and I'm really sad. I don't visit here for up to date news, I can get that elsewhere; I come here for the discussions. But so many of the commenters here are scarily uninformed. And where they're not informed, many of them seem poisoned.
This is a geek site - we're supposed to be able to view information objectively and without being tainted by unrelated information. This reads more like a political forum :(
Firstly, these accusations stem from months ago, so this has nothing to do with the most leak. Sweden have been pursuing the interviews and warrants for a number of weeks now.
Secondly, what's with all of the conspiracy nuts here ? Why is everyone second guessing his reasons for not wanting to go in and talk to the police ?
He offered to go in repeatedly when he was still in the country. When his residence claim was denied, he asked if there was any reason he had to stay in the country and he was told that he was free to leave. So he did. Now he's in another country, and he's _still_ offering to talk to them but he's not prepared to schlepp back there - that's not unreasonable, is it?
Oh, I bet Julian Assange fully expects to be martyred "for the cause" at some point. He probably has some interesting "dead man's switch" set up to do something amusing after he goes... if it could make some point about how the world isn't ready for transparency then so much the better.
If these things don't go through WikiLeaks, they'd just go through something else. Hey, maybe his dead man's switch unleashes some sort of decentralized P2P leak site :P