Slashdot Mirror
Google Handed To FBI 3 Wikileaks Staffers' Emails, Digital Data
Ariastis writes Google took almost three years to disclose to the open information group WikiLeaks that it had handed over emails and other digital data belonging to three of its staffers to the FBI under a secret search warrant issued by a federal judge. WikiLeaks were told last month of warrants which were served in March 2012. The subjects of the warrants were the investigations editor of WikiLeaks, the British citizen Sarah Harrison; the spokesperson for the organisation, Kristinn Hrafnsson; and Joseph Farrell, one of its senior editors. When it notified the WikiLeaks employees last month, Google said it had been unable to say anything about the warrants earlier as a gag order had been imposed.
Legality of tax evasion schemes is flaky, moreso - it's quite hard to nail corporations for it, because they follow the letter of the law and game the system in order to minimize their taxes. Now telling FBI off and refusing to comply with a court order is entirely different game - penalties can range up to total halt of all services google provides on US soil and confiscation of every tangible item feds can get their hands on. You want change - go whine at government for insilling the rules not at corporations playing by them.
ixquick.com
yandex.com
torproject.org
You realise that on all of the counts listed in the European Arrest Warrant, dual criminality was asserted and thus no UK judge found grounds to dismiss on the basis of lack of criminality in the offences listed?
See page 15 of the following PDF:
http://webarchive.nationalarch...
And you should also check out what the offences listed actually are, because your description is quite a way off.
The offence described as rape is as follows:
[quote]
On 17 August 2010, in the home of the injured party (SQ) in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state.
It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party's sexual integrity.
[/quote]
Offence 4, Page 3 of the above document.
The lack of a condom used also shows up in Offence 2, Page 2, for a different injured party (AA).
How about you Assange supporters actually get your facts right about what the arrest warrant actually lays out? You can harp on about "such silly charges" but its patently obvious you have never actually read the rulings against Assange, which makes it trivial to dismiss you out of hand.
First off, it's just as easy to extradite someone to the US from the UK as it is from Sweden.
Sweden has helpfully allowed the US to extradite two people without going through the usual legal procedures. That is to say, they didn't debate the matter in court: they just grabbed them off the street, bundled them into an airplane and flew them out of the country within a few hours. The only reason their lawyer even knew this was happening is because he was in the middle of a phone conversation with one of them when he was grabbed. The two of them were flown to Egypt, where they were tortured. (Or, just possibly, were treated with perfect humaneness by the Egyptian government, and concocted an elaborate lie about being tortured. And if you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.)
To my knowledge, there is no similar case of anyone being abducted from the UK with the consent of the UK government. If I had earned the enmity of the US, I'd feel much safer in the UK than in Sweden.
Twitter has fought these secret warrants and won.... Goggle could too if they gave a damn about their users.