Slashdot Mirror
Assange Requests Asylum In Ecuador
david.emery writes "Julian Assange, his appeals in the United Kingdom having run out, today went to the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to request asylum from his pending extradition to Sweden to face questioning for 'unlawful coercion and sexual misconduct including rape.'"
Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa is a friend of Venezuela and Cuba--and NO FRIEND of the U.S.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
the cops can't touch the embassy or their cars but once he steps out in the airport he is fair game
Is he really that afraid that he won't get a fair trial - in Sweden?!?
Is there something about the Swedish judicial system that I don't know about? Is it a kangaroo court or something?
What is Assange afraid of?
Stop beating your meat to your masochistic prison torture fantasies. Wikileaks mismanged itself into death, while Assange had burned bridges with everyone. He'll spend a couple years in a nice comfy swedish reformatory dormitory and everyone will forget about him except his groupies.
a half baked democracy on a third-world country (hey, I live on one of these, I know what I'm talking)
Greetings fellow USA resident
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
the "not wearing a condom" charge
Are you really naive enough to believe that's what ANY of this is about?
I mean, seriously?
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
What makes you think he'd ever face trial if he ended up in Sweden? Sweden has illegally rendered political refugees to the US to be tortured in the past. What makes you think they wouldn't do the same to Assange?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
>>>Are you really naive enough to believe that's what ANY of this is about?
I guess I am. Prove to me that something more nefarious is going on with this Sweden Condom Non-wearing case?
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Well, now it's about flushing $320000 of bail down the judicial drain. Not to mention the additional criminal charge (Bail Act offense, or whatever is applicable in the United Kingdom in this instance -- not my area of law).
>>>" those CIA agents over in that other plane are going to have a word with you. Goodbye."
Why do you think that will happen? I'd like some citations, not some random Alex Jones-style conspriacist rambling. Kay-kay? Thanks.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Yes, some of us are really that naive.
Sweden is very liberal about the protection of women and what should constitute sexual abuse. He was a big name, and he broke the law to the point he used his influence to do things that would get other men arrested too. And then instead of answering the charges, he fled the country. Over something that might get him $1000 in fines and told not to come back to the country.
In most countries, what he did would be considered douchebaggery of the highest proportions. In Sweden, they find it criminal...even if it is pretty much a slap on the wrist. When a big name does it, they need to make an example...and the example is he pays a fine much smaller than he has wasted in lawyers so far and goes home. He could have taken care of this months ago, but he wanted to stay in the public eye and pretend that he was oppressed. I wish I could fuck one woman, convince her to drop me off at another woman's home. Fuck her without a condom after telling her I was wearing one, and then go back to the first and pull my condom off halfway through and brag about it...while having half the world look at me as if I'm a political prisoner for doing so...and probably fuck another dozen women in the process.
Gotta hand it to him...he knows how to play others. Are you so naive to think that a man so skilled at manipulation isn't manipulating you?
(BTW I think the US would LOVE to have him in custody, but we all know that he committed no crimes in the US. Treason is not a crime if you aren't a citizen...regardless of what Republicans would like to have you believe)
Way to drink the kool-aid. That or you are astro turfing.
He's not even being charged by the women involved anymore. The women suddenly wanted to charge him AFTER they were approached by a swedish prosecutor. They later attempted to drop the charges, were told they couldn't, eventually succeeded in dropping the charges, only to have the charges somehow re-instituted by a swedish prosecutor with known high up US ties under pressure from the swedish government.
This is all as reported by the SWEDISH Press. Stop fucking astro-turfing to attempt to cover this shit up. This is the most blatant abuse of power by the US over its allies I've ever seen.
>>>He is in trouble for obtaining a sex act that the other partner did not consent to
Som she claims. Several days later. AFTER she found-out the Assange was two-timing her. If you believe this woman you're really gullible, and I have a 6 GHZ laptop you might be interested in.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
But I wonder if the next time someone in Sweden (but, for the sake of argument, someone who hasn't angered our rulers as Assange has) has sex with a sleeping partner and skips the country, there will again be a European arrest order and a worldwide Interpol hunt?
How inappropriate to call this planet Earth, when clearly it is Ocean.
And so has the UK. Where he is now.
Why do people constantly forget that it's just as easy for the US to grab him from Britain as it is Sweden?
Ah yes, "allegedly at the request of the CIA" means the US was kicking down the door and picking him up. The link you provided shows that Sweden denied asylum and ejected him back to Egypt. Perhaps at the CIA's request, perhaps not. No proof is offered other than the allegation of the man who was deported.
As to your question - what makes me think they wouldn't do the same to Assange? The simple fact that without the UK's permission, Sweden would be in violation of its treaty obligations as an EU member, and so would open itself up to trade sanctions, fines, and perhaps even ejection from the EU, not to mention being on the shit list of just every EU government in existence - so good luck when you need a favor, Sweden.
There'd have to be some extraordinary pressure on or incentive for Sweden to do this, and there is NO evidence to support the notion that the US is exerting pressure or offering big incentives. Assange is a narcissist who is simply trying to keep his name in the spotlight for another 15 minutes. He's also betraying his principles by fleeing to a third world country noted for its corruption and systemic abuses in an effort to remain free. I'm sure being the mouthpiece legitimizing such "progressive" regimes will work out really well for his campaign to improve the world. And you're an absolute fucking fool if you think for a second that they won't use him that way.
Because it is their system of laws.
Apparently, they can't even officially charge someone with a crime until they have met in person with the prosecutors.
I personally think it is a good idea to not charge and convict someone in abstentia -- even if they agree to it. It isn't good for ANY open and honest judicial system.
Sweden has an extradition treaty with a "conditional release" clause that allows them to extradite Assange without as much judicial review as the UK.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
European Arrest Warrant specifies that secondary extraditions require both the consent of the country extraditing and the original country. Assange is, if anything, safer in Sweden.
this is horseshit.
>> he broke the law to the point he used his influence to do things that would get other men arrested too.
what law did he break? and if he broke the law, why hasn't he been charged? and why do Sweden need to extradite someone to answer some questions about an investigation — not even a charge?
>> In most countries, what he did would be considered douchebaggery of the highest proportions. In Sweden, they find it criminal...even if it is pretty much a slap on the wrist. When a big name does it, they need to make an example...and the example is he pays a fine much smaller than he has wasted in lawyers so far and goes home.
this is just a joke. the women in question were tweeting about how cool he was AFTER the claimed rape. they both threw a party in his honor. the first swedish prosecutor DROPPED the whole thing because there wasn't enough evidence; so Sweden reappointed a new prosecutor to drudge the thing up.
>> Gotta hand it to him...he knows how to play others. Are you so naive to think that a man so skilled at manipulation isn't manipulating you?
You're the one being played, friend.
Who died because of his actions? Name a single person who died. Link to a single story in a reputable newspaper that details how someone lost their life as a result of leaks he published.
I live and Sweden and everything you type (and belive) about Sweden is wrong; the only thing you are right about is that Assange is a douchbag.
Getting convicted for ANY violent crime in Sweden with out a confession is very uncommon. We have several cases of murder where all the partisipants have gone free since it has been impossible to prove which one of the accused delivered the killing blow, and they have been convicted of desecrating a corpse since it was impossible to prove that the person was alive when they delivered their blow. A few years back we had a guy who was equitted of rape since he was the last one in the gang rape to have sex with the girl. When it was his turn she was so chocked that she was paralysed. The Swedish court ruled that since she had not protested he was off the hook for rape.
It is unheard of that the Swedish court goes after a man because a woman is pissed because he screwed around. Hunting him across the globe? We don't even do that with convicted killers!
Strange that we have an American deserter turning up so close to Assange getting here. I wonder if there will be two people on that plane back to the US of A.
He was a big name, and he broke the law to the point he used his influence to do things that would get other men arrested too. And then instead of answering the charges, he fled the country.
Ahem... what charges?
Hello someone that doesn't understand that the system of justice in one country isn't the same in another country.
In Sweden, it has been established over and over in these debates, one cannot be charged with a crime unless they have been questioned in person.
He left the country before he could be questioned in person. Yes, one prosecutor decided there wasn't enough evidence at the time...and another said there was enough to question him. Even in the US, this happens all the time. And it is rarely politically motivated...
I wouldn't be surprised if the US had a part in this...however, I think that Assange had a MUCH bigger part...and I believe Sweden may just be following their own rules, even if the US likes that they are. if someone pisses me off and I see them jaywalking while a cop had his back to my enemy...I might just walk over to the cop and mention how dangerous it is for that guy to be endangering the cars going by and encourage them to follow the laws already there, if nothing more than to piss the guy off a little.
I don't think it takes any conspiracy to note the US is probably enjoying this as they know it is destroying Wikileaks. However, I don't think there is any nefarious plan to extradite him...especially as we have extradition treaties with the UK as well and could just as easily asked to bring him over with the caveat that we'd have to promise not to kill him...that's the only thing the UK asks...and I don't think the US could do this legally...much easier to kill him right where he was in the first place and even if everyone knew it was the US, we'd still have plausible deniability. That's the problem with you conspiracy theorists...you don't think of the simplest solutions. Occam's Razor...
Some points to notice, in case you care amidst your ad hominems and strawmen.
1. He didn't break the law. The women who he supposedly "raped" only got pissed because they found out Assange had sex with both of them. The other even tweeted how cool it was to meet Assange and how she couldn't "wait to meet the cool people [incl. Assange] again this evening" (this was following the "rape"). If you were really raped, would you be tweeting like that? No.
2. Assange did not flee. He was not told to stay. There was ample time to collect Assange, but nothing was done, so Assange left after several days. Once Assange went out of the country the Swedish prosecutor went apeshit. Assange become an Interpol wanted persona. Of course, this was according to plan.
The saddest part of Wikileaks is that even after they show irrefutable proof of war crimes and other nasty dealings, what is the reaction - people just chant their national anthem louder. That is sad and disgusting.
It's almost as disgusting as people fervently defending that massive system which conducts those kind of abuses on a daily basis.
It happened in Sweden at least once before. The people were innocent. CIA took them and "extraordinarily renditioned" them. In English this means they kidnapped innocent people and then tortured them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition#Sweden
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_al-Zery
PS. It doesn't really take much effort to look these things up. I don't know why you live in denial, but CIA has basically never been the friendly neighbourhood spiderman. Read up on their history, it's fascinating and gives you some idea how and why CIA does what it does.
Apparently, they can't even officially charge someone with a crime until they have met in person with the prosecutors.
Additionally, they must meet the prosecutors in Sweden (a Swedish embassy is no good) and it must be a face to face meeting (over teleconference is not good).
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
Sweden is not a lap dog of the United States.
Assange should show up in Sweden, get the case resolved, then go home. End of paranoid story.
How, pray tell did Wikileaks mismanage anything? Seems to me that they got an awful lot of important information to press where it belonged. Like what our elected representatives actually think of the war in Afghanistan, or the fact that there was a certain senator in the Australian parliament passing information to the US embassy. Information we, the people who elect the senate didn't know but should have, by rights. Or that a US defence contractor was buying Afghan boys to be raped by war lords. Kind of critical information if that defence contractor is also buying US congressman.
Horseshit. If this was their system of laws, then surely it must have been put to use before Assange. Strangely, it hasn't.
He was given permission to leave Sweden. So he did. Then something weird and as yet unexplained happened and another prosecutor decided he was guilty of something without including the two women the original questioning had been about.
I've never heard of this "have to be in Sweden to be questioned by a prosecutor" before. Presumably neither Assange nor his lawyers have as well. The prosecutor was asked several times to come to London during the last 450+ days of house arrest but refused without saying why.
If a prosecutor is enough of a "judicial authority" (not in this country they aren't) to authorise a EAW then the Swedish embassy is Swedish enough to be a venue for questioning.
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
Conspiracy theories always include a way for the little guy to fight back, the David vs Goliath story. There aren't any conspiracy theories I know of that say we're all doomed so just huddle in your basements. There's always some sort of way for those in the know to resist: tin foil hats, spreading informational fliers, not using currency, etc. So the theories can get more complex in order to provide an out for the repressed.
Of the two countries, the UK would seem much more likely to hand over someone in secret to the US, and Sweden is more likely to follow the rules of EU commissions. But applying for amnesty or holding extradition hearings fits the story of the little guy fighting back against the all powerful yet easily thwarted enemy.
Treason is not a crime if you aren't a citizen...regardless of what Republicans would like to have you believe
And being a military aged man within 100 meters of an al-quaeda suspect doesn't make you an enemy combatant either.
But the argument is moot if the drone strike kills you.
Simply being innocent isn't protection. He (rightly in my opinion) beleives the US system cannot be relied upon to treat him justly, so its better to stay out of the system.
And then instead of answering the charges, he fled the country.)
I'm sorry, but he did answer the charges.
When all charges were dropped, he asked if he was free to leave the country. Sweden said yes.
And then instead of answering the charges, he fled the country.
By "fled the country" you mean "asked prosecutors if it was ok if he leave then continued on his way", right?
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
If you're not a U.S. citizen you also have no constitutional rights
That's odd. I'm sure the fifth amendment begins with "No person". Not "No citizen of the US". Further to that, Article III asserts the supremacy of the US Supreme Court in applying the constitution to foreign citizens and amendment six refers to "the accused", not "the accused, if they happen to be born in the US and haven't pissed us off enough to ship them off to Guantanamo or add them to Obama's Kill List".
Just because you don't like the idea of justice doesn't mean it's not legally binding.
Sweden is not a lap dog of the United States.
Assange should show up in Sweden, get the case resolved, then go home. End of paranoid story.
I'm certain you are correct. What could possibly go wrong?
The Admin and the Engineer
Disclaimer: I'm a Swedish resident, and thus biased.
To answer your question; because Sweden has changed. At the time when the Egyptians were rendered, the Swedish population was convinced that Sweden was the best freest and marvelousest country the entire world. We simply didn't pay attention to things like this, because quite frankly we couldn't believe it would happen. The case of the Egyptians was a big eye opener for many here, and we were quite pissed off (well, as pissed off as Swedish people get).
The Assange case has, before anything really bad has even happened, attracted an enormous amount of publicity, and thus has the attention of every Swedish resident before it has even started (w/r to comparing it to the Egyptians). Some here may think Assange is an ass, some may think he should be put in prison and rot, and some may think he's innocent and/or a hero, but nobody seems to think that he should be given to the US. The public is keeping a very close eye on this case, and an extradition would be a political shit storm beyond anything we've seen for ages.
I'm honestly not particularly proud of how "my" country has acted in this - I can certainly see that the Swedish prosecution seems quite incompetent - but I really do not think that Assange would be dumped off the US. It would be political suicide for everybody involved in the process.
May we live long and die out
The woman that he is alleged to have raped has tried to drop the case that she was persuaded to bring.
In most of the world, if a woman does not want to bring a case, the suspect has nothing to answer. What he may have done does not seem to have offended her sufficiently for her to want a court case.
The prosecutor that has managed to bring this case is alleged to be a shill for the USA.
Assange has performed a huge service for the USA, Australia, the UK and loads of other places by bringing to light the crimes of those who see themselves as our betters. That is his real "crime"
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
Julian Assange has not been charged with any crime in Sweden. There is a request for extradition to question him in relation to allegations of having sex without wearing a condom, which is in itself dubious as extraditions have in the past only been granted for convicted criminals. To extradite someone for questioning is a world first. And top pretend that a country like the USA has nothing to do with it is naive to say the least. The USA uses financial and political pressure to force countries that cannot invade to strip down and bend over. They even kill people arbitrarily without due process! If I were Julian Assange, I would have been running long ago.
Easy to say, and you may be completely right.
Would you be willing to bet your life on it though? I know I wouldn't. And seems Assange would prefer not to as well.
It makes him look guilty of the "not wearing a condom" charge. He should just go face the trial, especially since there's no way they can prove he's guilty (it's just her word vs. his).
Are you really naive enough to believe that's what ANY of this is about?
I guess I'm just as naive as cpu6502, because I believe this too. Honestly, my first thought on reading this was "urgh, that does NOT look good...guy looks like he's running for cover". Innocent or guilty, running off to South America has a strong appearance of someone trying to escape the law.
Do I think the U.S. government is completely ambivalent about the chap? Well, duh, of course they're likely to be somewhat annoyed. Do I think this entire shambles is some huge conspiracy? And that Sweden, of all places, is just going to roll over in acquiescence? Come on...
Assange is a creep. Looking at the whole "using force" bit, the "not using a condom when you knew full well the woman didn't want that" bit, the guy is a jerk and a creep. Yes, you might think he's a hero with Wikileaks. That doesn't mean he's not a creep. In some countries what he did would just get him branded a creep; in Sweden, they are a bit more adamant about protecting women's rights and they think he did something criminal.
If he doesn't like it and says the charges are without basis, well, man up and go back and fight the charges, and then bugger off to Ecuador or anywhere else you want to, in a fit of self-righteous pique. But the guy needs to take responsibility for his actions.
Personally I think half the reason he doesn't want to is because he's afraid he won't get yanked out to the United States. That would really damage his whole martyr/conspiracy victim image. Without that he's a seriously underwhelming and unprepossessing figure. He'll get prosecuted, he'll be freed, or he might serve some jail time, and in a few months or a few years he'll come out, not having been assassinated. But by then everyone will have forgotten about him.
It took me about three months before I was comfortable using the word "rape" for what happened to me. It takes time to get past blaming yourself and trying to convince yourself it was nothing because there exist others who had it worse than you. I met a girl who actually started dating the guy who raped her just so that it wouldn't seem so much like rape. You just don't want to see yourself as a victim. Not only because it feels demeaning to yourself, to have become victimized, but because whether consciously or subconsciously you don't want the perpetrator to have "succeeded". You count your victories, whether large or small, whether it's stopping them from kissing you on the mouth or even something like managing to keep your shoes on.
Musk needs a safer hobby than Twitter. Fire juggling? Cage fighting? Solo hot air balloon trips?
I would agree with you - if you take the case against Assange in isolation, that is. But when you widen the scope of your consideration to the events surrounding Assagne at the time, and factor in the part where the judges dismissed the case and then mysteriously reopened it then you should get a better idea of why something more nefarious is going on.
Way to drink the kool-aid. That or you are astro turfing.
He's not even being charged by the women involved anymore. The women suddenly wanted to charge him AFTER they were approached by a swedish prosecutor. They later attempted to drop the charges, were told they couldn't, eventually succeeded in dropping the charges, only to have the charges somehow re-instituted by a swedish prosecutor with known high up US ties under pressure from the swedish government.
This is all as reported by the SWEDISH Press. Stop fucking astro-turfing to attempt to cover this shit up. This is the most blatant abuse of power by the US over its allies I've ever seen.
This may be a newsflash to you, but victims don't charge defendants. They're even usually referred to as "complaining witnesses". Prosecutors charge defendants, and only prosecutors can bring charges or drop them. Even if what you said was true about women, which it isn't, they would lack any power to "charge" him or "drop the charges". Hence, why should we believe your frothing rantings about astro-turfing and abuses of power?
Because as a matter of process you have to be questioned before you're charged.
In general stuff that if it really supprised you, then you are an idiot.
Strawman. Whether or not a person is suprised is not even in question. Like all right thinking people I was repulsed, angered, but not surprised that boys were being raped and the US was complicit in these horrific acts.
yes we all know our respective countries feed us a degree of propaganda. Because there are some voter disapproved things that need to be done to keep alies, or some representatives who can't keep their mouth shut or use the information to mess up a plan. Nothing leaked from Wikileaks was that big deal if you think a little more big picture.
I see. And what of the murdered and raped people in question? Was it a big deal for them? Should they have focused on the bigger picture? If I bombed your daughters wedding and slaughtered your family and then stole your son and raped him, would you just accept that I did that for the greater good? Or do you imagine that the US is somehow exceptional and it's citizens treated better than everyone else? If so, you are grievously wrong.
It ain't a perfect world, and your side isn't always the good side.
I choose a side based on the actions of that side. So, after the revelations obtained by Wikileaks, will many others. And there is nothing that you, or your pederast buddies can do about that.
Because, yet again, as a matter of process the next step is (potentially) charging you, which requires them to have you in custody.
This is standard procedure.
You're confused, because 'charged' does not mean what you think it means in the Swedish justice system.
In the Swedish System 'charged' is the step where they take you before a court to get judged and sentenced. Before they can do that they obviously need to finish their investigation which includes questioning the subject.
The reason you're confused is because you're trying to find a direct analogue for 'charged' when there isn't any.
The way things work is that the police investigate a crime, and once they find a suspect they will inform him about their suspicions and ask him to come in for questioning.
This questioning can legally only be done physically in person, not by email, not by telephone, not by video-conference. If you do not come voluntarily then they will arrest you and bring you in for questioning instead.
After questioning you will then either be released (minor crime or suspicions withdrawn) or jailed (major crime or just afraid you'll flee the country) at which point the prosecutor will take the case to court. As you can imagine the jailing part of that gets really rather complicated if you try to do it through teleconference.
Sweden is a very bureaucratic country, this means that if procedure states things are to be done in this order, then they will be done in this order and few if any exceptions will ever be made for any reason.
The prosecutor was asked several times to come to London during the last 450+ days of house arrest but refused without saying why.
Or even better, why didn't they fly a judge from Sweden to the UK to have the trial there, acquit Assange, and send him on his way? Isn't that the way that Justice normally works? When the suspect refuses to return and fights extradition, don't you normally fly the judge to them? Is that what your country does? Why not? Do you claim that they "refused without saying why"? You seem to have a very odd view of how the judicial system works in any country, let alone Sweden.
If a prosecutor is enough of a "judicial authority" (not in this country they aren't) to authorise a EAW then the Swedish embassy is Swedish enough to be a venue for questioning.
Yes, and the point must be made once against that Sweden has its own legal system with different laws and customs than yours. There is more than one country in the EU in which prosecutors are considered judicial authorities, so there is nothing odd there. Now tell us, when has your country flown a judge or prosecutor to a foreign country to interrogate a suspect in a rape case who is a fugitive from justice and refuses to return? Why do you think Sweden should adopt this unusual practice and not your country?
Then something weird and as yet unexplained happened and another prosecutor decided he was guilty of something without including the two women the original questioning had been about.
It isn't unexplained, or weird, you are just uninformed.
Renewed rape suspicions for WikiLeaks' Assange
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
So, my cant the question him at their embasy in london, or question him over the phone ?
If its not a setup, then why is the prosecution prepared to waste time and money trying trying to put him in a cell before they ask questions.
So, is it common practice for your country to fly prosecutors or judges to speak to people who refuse to surrender and fight extradition for crimes like rape? Or does the government simply seek extradition? Your question is nonsense - countries don't do that. Do you think you could phone up the judge and tell him you don't want to come to his court despite a summons? That he can just conduct the business over the phone? Not so much.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
I guess I am. Prove to me that something more nefarious is going on with this Sweden Condom Non-wearing case?
How about the Interpol arrest warrant?
Interpol aren't policemen. Interpol's job is to coordinate police forces of different countries when they're working on catching people who operate in those countries. They provide interpreters, make sure everybody has copies of all the evidence, etc. There's no way they can be involved in something that only happened in one country and in fact their constitution forbids it..
Their constitution also forbids them getting involved in any crime which doesn't carry a minimum one year jail sentence. Assanges is wanted for questioning over something which has a 750 Euro fine.
Short version: The Interpol warrant proves there's corruption at very high levels.
No sig today...