Julian Assange May Surrender To British Police On Friday (twitter.com)

bestweasel writes: As reported by The Guardian and others, Julian Assange has announced via Wikileaks that: "Should the UN announce tomorrow that I have lost my case against the United Kingdom and Sweden, I shall exit the embassy at noon on Friday to accept arrest by British police as there is no meaningful prospect of further appeal. ... However, should I prevail and the state parties be found to have acted unlawfully, I expect the immediate return of my passport and the termination of further attempts to arrest me."

Comments

should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

So if he gets off, gets his passport back, then what?
The slightest legal issue anywhere and you can bet that a country would want to arrest him.

Re:should be interesting

[Noah Haders]

Maybe he shouldn't have legal issues? Just keep his head down?

Re: should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Officer: Sir, your car tyre is over the line meaning that you have parked illegally. You will now be transferred to Guantanamo Bay for 12 years of interrogation and torture. We take parking tickets very seriously around here.

Re:should be interesting

[tlambert]

Maybe he shouldn't have legal issues? Just keep his head down?

That's a fantastic idea! No one should ever make waves, or make things uncomfortable for The Powers That Be(tm)!

Everybody wins! [If they happen to be one of The Powers That Be(tm); otherwise they lose...]

While we are at it, let's put the final nails in the coffin of all investigative, yet inconvenient, reporting!

Also: I want a pony...

Re:should be interesting

[quenda]

So if he gets off, gets his passport back, then what?

Well, we know where he advised Edward Snowden that was safe from CIA black ops, and it's not Equador.
I'm betting Assange has spent some of the last few years learning Russian.

What has the world come to?

Re:should be interesting

[spork invasion]

I disagree. Investigative reporting is good, but it can be sensationalized and it's really done for profit. In many cases, investigative reports don't release the documents and interviews that form the basis of the stories. There isn't a lot of transparency, and reports don't actually want the transparency. See this article complaining that once an FOIA request is made for a document, the documents are made freely available to anyone, which would be damaging to investigative reporters. In short, they want access to the documents requested under the FOIA but don't want others to have access because it would cut into their profits from reporting. Although Wikileaks can't be fully trusted because they are (necessarily) selective about what they release, it's not biased out of desire for profit and it's transparent enough in that you see the original documents.

Re:should be interesting

[phantomfive]

The UN working group on human rights has no authority to do much of anything. Here is the current membership. After making a decision, they will work with the countries involved to help them "Do the Right Thing." They can't force England or Sweden to let him go.

Re:should be interesting

[93 Escort Wagon]

So if he gets off, ...

Wasn't that what got him into this mess to start with?

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

... also maybe he should stop raping all the women.

Not that it's got anything to do with me, but I do sometimes wonder how that is going, cooped up inside that embassy. Does he have groupies like Snowden doesn't want to have? Does he phone out orders, like for pizza?

Re:should be interesting

[ChunderDownunder]

Everyone needs a hobby. Why shouldn't he learn a foreign language in his spare time...

Except that ASCII Slashdot doesn't support Cyrillic.

Re:should be interesting

[Freultwah]

PECTOPAH "MOPKOBKA". CEKC HA 3ABTPAK.

See, you can work with what you have.

Re:should be interesting

[TheReaperD]

Ok, I keep hearing "rape" being brought up but, the charge is not quite what it seems. The women in question did not go to the police with charges of sexual assault. One of them discovered that the condom came off, during consensual sex, and after she was unable to locate him, went to the police to locate him for the purpose of taking a STD test. After a short time, federal authorities and US authorities were involved in the case (for a STD test!) and they convinced one of the women to upgrade her complaint to failure to cease sexual activity immediately upon request; namely he didn't stop instantly when the condom came off, it took a few moments. This does not qualify as any sort of a crime in most countries, including the US and UK. Yet, for this, even by Sweden's standards, minor charge, he was wanted by Interpol and had an international manhunt for him to the point of having to take shelter in an embassy. And there's been a 24 hour guard around the embassy ever since in case they try to move him or he comes out. US and UK authorities still try to claim that this has nothing to do with his involvement in Wikileaks or US authorities' interest in him, they only want justice for the women in Sweden. Smells like bullshit to me.

Re:should be interesting

[TheReaperD]

They went to the police to locate him for a STD test, not for rape charges. Officials "convinced" one of the women to upgrade her charge. She's wanted it dropped ever since.

Re:should be interesting

[cold fjord]

Your post is a bunch of baloney. Assange's extradition went to the Supreme Court in the UK and the allegations against him were judged to include rape. Assange was wanted on an international arrest warrant because Sweden filed for it. Assange went to the embassy to escape arrest, deportation, and judgment. Please substantiate the involvement of US authorities regarding "STD testing." Your bullshit detector is miscalibrated.

Re:should be interesting

[phantomfive]

Bonus: google translate can't figure it out when written in ASCII.
Translation: Morkobka restaurant. Sex and Breakfast.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Citation?

Re:should be interesting

[queazocotal]

Journalists unfortunately, need to get paid. If, when you are making a feature of some form, and waiting for 20 responses to FOIA - if someone comes along and writes an article on the first 15, you're pretty much screwed, and don't get paid (directly, or your employer) this means less investigative journalism. Journalism is pretty much dying - especially investigative journalism like this.

Re:should be interesting

[Znork]

There's a reason why Sweden has one of the highest rape rates in the world and it's not because there are that many actual rapes going on.

But it is somewhat amusing to watch the racists and the feminists fight over it, as the racists claim it's because the immigrants and the feminists have to constantly switch their realities back and forth between 'it's only a statistical issue' and 'but rape is everywhere!', depending on the situation...

But yes, if you read the original police documents, the purpose of going to the police was to force an STD test. That the US was involved I rather doubt, as any borderline chargeable offense will automatically be pushed by the police and prosecution whether the supposed victim wants it or not it's quite enough that an activist prosecutor like Marianne Ny smells some publicity and the opportunity to 'send a message' to start that chain of events and completely screw up the victims life far beyond the original issue. Hopefully Ny's utter incompetence in this has put a permanent black mark on her career.

Re:should be interesting

[Richard_at_work]

Read the British judges conclusions - they consider the concept of "dual criminality", which is a requirement for extradition from the UK. Under UK law, the same charges are indeed classed as rape. So yes, it is exactly what it seems.

Re:should be interesting

[Freultwah]

Pretty close. "Restaurant Carrot" and "sex for breakfast".

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

The OP AC here.
When I posted that I was actually wondering whether to reword it :P

Re:should be interesting

[quenda]

After a short time, federal authorities and US authorities were involved in the case (for a STD test!) ...

You can see why this will never be made into a Hollywood movie - it's too implausible.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course the US was involved. One of the women who put forward charges worked and still works for the CIA. At least that's what the publicly available evidence suggests.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Read the UK Court documents. He was accused of physically pinning her down and raping her after she asked him to stop when he took the condom off, and also of initiating sex without a condom while she was asleep after she'd explicitly said she would only consent to sex with a condom.

Would you like to wake up to find Julian Assange raping you without a condom?

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

At the same time, the purpose of FOIA isn't to help journalists, it is to ensure that data collected and held by public bodies has a way of becoming publicly available to the general public. If that suits journalists then great, if not, well, it wasn't specifically intended for them anyway and supporting their particular needs is not FOIAs purpose.

Re: should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Who's a spy for which enemy exactly? The only enemy here are western governments, including the US, who will engage in any activity at all to promote their multinational corporations, protect their overseas assets at taxpayer expense, and suppress by any means necessary anybody who tries to tell the truth about that, especially when they have proof.

The US has always had a problem with being full of idiots who think their country can do no wrong anywhere. A disturbing number of our population (radical conservatives) have a proven psychological issue where showing them proof of something that contradicts their beliefs actually makes those beliefs stronger. It's a mental problem that constantly gets exploited for the gain of large economic interests.

Asssnge and Snowden are guilty of one thing: exposing the dirty dealings of the US and its allies, and the extent to which governments try to control the population lest they actually decide to do something about it.

 

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

She made him breakfast the next morning, apparently the victim did not think she was a victim. In fact she did not even go to police until she found out he had slept with her friend as well. So it was consensual until she decided to remove the consent after the fact.

Re:should be interesting

[cold fjord]

There's a reason why Sweden has one of the highest rape rates in the world and it's not because there are that many actual rapes going on.

The Swedes will be glad to hear that. Of course you realize there are different views about that.

But it is somewhat amusing to watch the racists and the feminists fight over it,...

I suppose it would be a shame for nobody to get a benefit from the situation.

But it is somewhat amusing to watch the racists and the feminists fight over it,

If it turns out the "racists" are correct in some fashion, does that make them "racists"?

But yes, if you read the original police documents, the purpose of going to the police was to force an STD test.

Traumatized people don't always think right.

That the US was involved I rather doubt

In absence of evidence that is a good thing.

as any borderline chargeable offense will automatically be pushed by the police and prosecution whether the supposed victim wants it or not

See my first comment.

it's quite enough that an activist prosecutor like Marianne Ny smells some publicity and the opportunity to 'send a message' to start that chain of events and completely screw up the victims life far beyond the original issue.

Interesting rhetoric, but I don't recall hearing that it was the prosecutor that "screwed up" anyone's life. I would think Assange might have played a roll in that.

Hopefully Ny's utter incompetence in this has put a permanent black mark on her career.

That is probably what happened to the first prosecutor.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

You are all confused about the story and charges still.

the charge is rape as defined under Swedish law, which includes have unprotected sex with another person while having an STD and not informing the partner before hand.

the woman they talk about as the spy is the one who tracked down the other girls after he had moved on (i think he left the country and came back). she asked them if he had an STD and they didn't know. then convinced them to go down the police to make the inquiry, as they didn't know how to contact him. the other two stated they where shock my the interview questions asked and tried to drop it. but it was to late. from there a few shady decisions by the police. Then whole lot of media crap and this is where we are now.

My 2c: if he did brake the law as defined above then i say charge him and prosecute. i would also like to see more countries adopt this definition of rape.

Re:should be interesting

[cold fjord]

Let's rewrite that with reality in mind:

Traumatized victim of sexual assault goes to police while still in denial and worried about her health (naturally). As she is speaking to the police about her health concern they realize that under the law a sexual assault has taken place and start an investigation. Assange's friends, allies, and advocates have been spinning ever since.

Re:should be interesting

[NicBenjamin]

I don'; know about not leaking, but not having sex with woman you have to start "holding her arms and bending her legs open and trying to penetrate her" would be a pretty good start at avoiding legal problems.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Stockholm syndrome...

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

If it turns out the "racists" are correct in some fashion, does that make them "racists"?

Irrelevant. The racists are still racists. It doesn't matter if they wear pink slippers on Saturday mornings or if they also like to play tennis.
Immigrants being overrepresented among crimes is used as an argument to punish those who doesn't commit crimes. That is racist and unfair.
You can easily spot a racist. The particular argument doesn't matter, they will always come to the conclusion that all people who are different from them are the same and should be treated as a group and punished as a group rather than individuals.
Yes, I am a Swede and the thing that worries me isn't that I see more black skin than I usually do on my way to work. The thing that worries me is that I recently got "political information" in the mail talking about preserving the Aryan genes and fighting a race war.

Re:should be interesting

[AchilleTalon]

So if he gets off, gets his passport back, then what?

He may join the UN peacekeepers' force since they start to get a reputation of raping in poor countries they are called to help.

Re:should be interesting

[Joce640k]

a) Now he had an STD....? That's news.

b) Nobody except the Swedish prosecutor is sure what exactly he's accused of. The Swedish police didn't think he'd done anything, they let him go. The prosecutor only became interested int he case when she was on a fishing trip through the police computers using the search term "Julian Assange". After she found his name on a police statement she called the two girls in and persuaded them to upgrade their query to "complaint" so she could call Assange in. Both the girls later regretted doing this after they figured out what was really going on and how they'd been manipulated by the prosecutor.

c) He has hasn't been _charged_ with anything, he's wanted for an *interview*. He's offered to do the interview on numerous occasions, just not in Sweden; Because Sweden has a weird law that allows them to "lend" him to the USA.

Re:should be interesting

[peragrin]

wikileaks is biased though. Wikileaks has been shown to edit documents and footage to alter their meaning. hiding the originals as they do so.

or did you forget the footage from the iraq they posted a number of years back. the original and the wikileaks version were very different

Re:should be interesting

[peragrin]

You do realize that no one in sweden is tried or even charged in absentia. You have to appear before a judge before charges can even be filed or dismissed.

I really wish idiots like you would stop thinking swedish law is the same as English common law.

Also Sweden doesn't have any laws to allow them to lend someone to another country. That goes against both Swedish law and EU law.

Re:should be interesting

[ArchieBunker]

Citation please? Which also brings up the point, if you are such a high profile person why are you fucking around with questionable people? Keeping a low profile includes keeping your dick in your pants.

Re:should be interesting

[moronoxyd]

Victims of domestic abuse often have a 'normal' relationship with their abuser before and after thoses episodes.
By your logic that would mean that no abuse did happen...

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

And you have the clearance to see the un-edited (by Wikileaks OR the Pentagon) originals, AND are allowed to post about it?

Somehow I don't believe you. Even members of congress don't get that kind of clearance. You are either allowed to know or to talk about it, never both.

Re: should be interesting

[bill_mcgonigle]

No, there's no evidence that Assange has an STD. According to reports, the woman who was kicked out of Cuba on charges of being a CIA spy (who he foolishly screwed) raised the issue with the other women and encouraged them to go to the police to inquire. They regret being used like that, but Asssange still has the Bank of America CxO hard drive image, so obviously this would happen (he was warned that he'd be honeypotted with sex and ignored it).

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realize that no one in sweden is tried or even charged in absentia.

Even the Swedish prosecutor has admitted that it happens all the time, in accordance with EU law.

Now, unless I have missed something, the UK hasn't left the EU yet, and neither has Sweden.

Re:should be interesting

[dave420]

Not all feminists believe the way you seem to think they do. That says more about you than them, unfortunately, and it's not good for you.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

That the US was involved I rather doubt

Do members of Congress talking about how he should just surrender to the Swedish police count as the US being involved?

I never heard about any member of Congress caring about any other rape case that neither involved a US citizen, nor happened in the US.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

And now let's restate that alternative 'reality' of yours as it actually happened: two women found out the same guy slept with them, and after a week went to the police with a report meant to get him in trouble. Police and prosecutor investigate, and decide to drop charges. In the meantime, a foreign power with a lot of influence over the government of Sweden applies pressure and a different prosecutor with a very controversial career, restarts the case with trumped-up charges some weeks later.

Re:should be interesting

[cold fjord]

. . . the same "cool" new "boyfriend" that shortly thereafter fled the country and abandoned her? (As if he was ever going to stay around . . .)

Got it? I'll bet you do.

Re: should be interesting

[cold fjord]

Well then, "thank goodness" you're here to help set the record straight. How could progress occur without folk like you?

The rush to smear Assange’s rape accuser

OK, so maybe the charges really are for rape-rape, but still — the woman has CIA ties! I’ve read that on at least a dozen blogs! Keith Olbermann tweeted it and everything! That’s got to be coming from a highly credible source, right?

Actually, as far as I can tell, the only source for that claim is an August Counterpunch article by Assange fanboys (seriously, they recast him as Neo of “The Matrix”) Israel Shamir and Paul Bennett. Here’s the most damning evidence Shamir and Bennett have compiled against Assange’s accuser:

1) She’s published “anti-Castro diatribes” in a Swedish-language publication that, according to an Oslo professor, Michael Seltzer (who?), is “connected with Union Liberal Cubana led by Carlos Alberto Montaner,” who reportedly has CIA ties. Let me repeat that: She has been published in a journal that is connected with a group that is led by a guy with CIA ties. Says this one guy.

2) “In Cuba she interacted with the feminist anti-Castro group Las damas de blanco (the Ladies in White). This group receives US government funds and the convicted anti-communist terrorist Luis Posada Carriles is a friend and supporter.” That link goes to an English translation of a Spanish article noting that at a march last spring, Posada “wander[ed] unleashed and un-vaccinated along Calle Ocho in Miami, marching alongside” — wait for it — “Gloria Estefan in support of the so-called Ladies in White.” Apparently, it’s “an established fact” that Posada and the Ladies also share a shady benefactor, which means he should clearly be called a “friend” of the organization, and this is totally relevant to the rape charges against Julian Assange, because the accuser once interacted with them in some manner.

Are you kidding me? That’s what we’re basing the “CIA ties” meme on? An article that reads like a screenplay treatment by a college freshman who’s terrified of women? Actual quote: “[T]he Matrix plays dirty and lets loose a sex bomb upon our intrepid Neo. When you can’t contest the message, you smear the messenger. Sweden is tailor-made for sending a young man into a honey trap.”

Re:should be interesting

[umghhh]

Well a short check against other countries with high level population of immigrants living off welfare (this does not include US as the welfare for immigrants is rather not existent or?) like Austria may give you a clue. But indeed Sweden's rape laws and this particular case are way off the mark for a reasonable country.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

And that doesn't stop monkeys from flying out of your butt, but my bet is neither will happen.

Re:should be interesting

[Applehu Akbar]

Maybe women should stop referring to regret as rape.

Mod this one up!

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

And by making it work like that you likely reduce the amount of data collected and held by public bodies that is released to the public - since journalists won't make as many FOIA requests since doing so will actively harm them. Which seems like the intended consequence of making the change in the first place.

Re: should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Ding dimg we have a winner

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe not.

The rush to smear Assange’s rape accuser

Actually, as far as I can tell, the only source for that claim is an August Counterpunch article by Assange fanboys (seriously, they recast him as Neo of “The Matrix”) Israel Shamir and Paul Bennett. Here’s the most damning evidence Shamir and Bennett have compiled against Assange’s accuser:

1) She’s published “anti-Castro diatribes” in a Swedish-language publication that, according to an Oslo professor, Michael Seltzer (who?), is “connected with Union Liberal Cubana led by Carlos Alberto Montaner,” who reportedly has CIA ties. Let me repeat that: She has been published in a journal that is connected with a group that is led by a guy with CIA ties. Says this one guy.

2) “In Cuba she interacted with the feminist anti-Castro group Las damas de blanco (the Ladies in White). This group receives US government funds and the convicted anti-communist terrorist Luis Posada Carriles is a friend and supporter.” That link goes to an English translation of a Spanish article noting that at a march last spring, Posada “wander[ed] unleashed and un-vaccinated along Calle Ocho in Miami, marching alongside” — wait for it — “Gloria Estefan in support of the so-called Ladies in White.” Apparently, it’s “an established fact” that Posada and the Ladies also share a shady benefactor, which means he should clearly be called a “friend” of the organization, and this is totally relevant to the rape charges against Julian Assange, because the accuser once interacted with them in some manner.

3) The accuser is a known feminist who once wrote a blog post about getting revenge on men, and “was involved in Gender Studies in Uppsala University, in charge of gender equality in the Students’ Union, a junior inquisitor of sorts.”

Are you kidding me? That’s what we’re basing the “CIA ties” meme on? An article that reads like a screenplay treatment by a college freshman who’s terrified of women? Actual quote: “[T]he Matrix plays dirty and lets loose a sex bomb upon our intrepid Neo. When you can’t contest the message, you smear the messenger. Sweden is tailor-made for sending a young man into a honey trap.”

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Try Google. Of course, Assange didn't know. She didn't wear a big CIA badge.

Re:should be interesting

[buck-yar]

I would bet my life savings if I followed you around long enough, I'd find you breaking a law.

Re:should be interesting

[tbannist]

But it is somewhat amusing to watch the racists and the feminists fight over it,

If it turns out the "racists" are correct in some fashion [gatestoneinstitute.org], does that make them "racists"?

Fortunately for everyone but the racists, their claims are not even close to true. For example, the very prominent claim of a 300% increase in violent crime since 1975, does not seem to be born out by actual data, which seems to show a modest decrease in crime over that time period.

Re:should be interesting

[peragrin]

Didn't need clearance. The us military released the entire video unedited to discredit and show just how badly edited the file was.

While it was only one point the very fact wiki leaks did edit the video shows they can't be trusted either

Re:should be interesting

[johnlcallaway]

And if they rule otherwise .. who cares. The UN has as much legal jurisdiction in this matter as the members of slashdot do.

Julian .. try personal responsibility and accept the consequences of your actions. Stop acting like you are any different than thousands of others that get accused of things. You don't deserve an of this attention, your 15 minutes of fame are over.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that

CIA goons with a private jet are waiting to ship the said prisoners to Egypt for some rubber hose cryptanalysis.

actually did happen.

Re:should be interesting

[MobyDisk]

It's BS. I did as the AC suggested, and Googled it. It looks like one of the women's best friend's mother's uncle's former roommate said something about Cuba one time. Or something silly like that.

http://www.theguardian.com/med...

What has most engaged the conspiracy theorists and Assange's more excitable defenders, however, are a few key incidents in Miss A career, in particular that she is said to have worked in the Swedish embassy in the US, and wrote her university thesis in 2007 on a vision of Cuba after the death of Castro.

This has led to widespread allegations that the woman is a CIA agent, planted as a honeytrap to bring down Assange. One blogger notes: "[Assange] just happens to meet a Swedish woman who just happens to have been publishing her work in a well-funded anti-Castro group that just happens to have links with a group led by a man at least one journalist describes as an agent of the CIA: the violent secret arm of America's foreign policy.

There are various more sensational articles, but none of those provide any evidence. This was the only article that seemed to explain the connection clearly.

Re: should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Eastern governments, including very prominently China and Russia, do a lot to promote the interests of their nation's businesses.

Re:should be interesting

[Joe_Dragon]

well after he get's jack rubyed there will be a moive about this.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Sewage + coffee = sewage. Even if it's just one drip of sewage.

The fact that the (by your implication) many feminists don't work VERY hard to vociferously disagree with the (by your implication) very few feminists that take the approach that everything is rape says a lot about feminists as a group.

And, unfortunately, it doesn't say anything good about them.

Or could you point me to major feminist organizations decrying the idea that watching a movie with a scantily clad female is rape? It should be very easy, since apparently it is a very common thing. Or maybe it is not and I'm right.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

the original and the wikileaks version were very different

Why do you people keep lying? Wikileaks released an edited version and the full video at the same time. The edited video showed the same thing as the full, that US military was trigger happy and ready to shoot at innocent unarmed civilians, the edited video having the tedium cut out of it. There was nothing in the long version that excused or justified the shootings.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the same kangaroo court that let Pinochet off the hook, although the crimes he was wanted for by Spain are very much on the books in the UK.

Re:should be interesting

[AK Marc]

I expect he'd be spending a lot more time in countries that don't have extradition with the USA. He's not afraid of being arrested. He's afraid of being sold to the US and tortured until dead, as the US has done before and has numerous executive orders from both parties allowing, condoning, or encouraging.

Re:should be interesting

[AK Marc]

You realize that many people have been charged in absentia in Sweden, right? It's standard practice to perform phone interviews, or send representatives to foreign locations for the pre-charge interview. They refused to do so with Assange, and required that he surrender himself physically to Sweden. Something that's *never* been done before (according to the news reports, feel free to let us know of another case where Sweden refused to interview someone who offered in a foreign country, but was instead extradited for a pre-charge interview).

Also Sweden doesn't have any laws to allow them to lend someone to another country. That goes against both Swedish law and EU law.

So Sweden has no ambassadors? No tourists? Nobody ever leaves? It's like the roach-motel of countries. And Sweden doesn't even have phones? Why couldn't the people already outside Sweden at http://www.swedenabroad.com/lo... walk down to Assange? It's illegal for someone from Sweden to walk?

That's why I default to believing Assange. The "other side" just seems insane.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Now, I'm not going to say that didn't happen, I'm not terribly familiar with the alleged circumstances, but without a link, I'm going to be skeptical. I've spent a lot of time in Sweden and befriended a lot of Swedish women. The thing to remember is, Sweden is considered to have one of the most "empowered" female populations on earth. It's the place where they'll invite you home, sleep with you, and then say they're tired and would like to go to sleep so would you please leave. I've never met a Swedish woman who's ever defined herself in any way by her man. For a Swedish girl to throw a party to present her boyfriend literally sounds out of character for the country.

Re:should be interesting

[ooloorie]

That's a fantastic idea! No one should ever make waves, or make things uncomfortable for The Powers That Be(tm)!

There are all sorts of ways in which people can "make things uncomfortable for The Powers That Be". Assange has chosen to leak secret documents. I'm glad the information came out. But that doesn't mean that what he did should be without consequences. Furthermore, Assange's activities seem to have been motivated in significant part by vindictiveness and a desire for notoriety and exposure, not altruism, and that makes him less than sympathetic to many people.

So, thanks Julian for the documents you leaked, but you still have to face the legal consequences of what you did and deal with the fact that nobody in their right mind would trust you.

Re:should be interesting

[jellomizer]

The best punishment for him, would be the fact that these evil governments really just don't care about his involvement in wiki-leaks. He is let out, he goes to sweden gets tried fairly for his charge.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

how much are you getting paid to write this crap?

You do know that the only people who thinks he raped the women aren't the women, but a slimy prosecutor in Sweden trying to make a name for themself. right?

Re:should be interesting

[RJBeery]

Why do you say that? The excel file pulled from your link shows a rate of 282 reported crimes against life and health per 100,000 residents in 1975, and a rate of 923 per 100,000 residents in 2014. That's a 327% increase over that time period.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't that what got him into trouble in the first place?

Re:should be interesting

[DrHyde]

And "the right thing" is to arrest Assange for jumping bail and haul him back in front of the court. The whole point is that he is *not* currently in detention (and so of course isn't being detained illegally) when he should be.

Re: should be interesting

[MachineShedFred]

So she has ties to two anti-Castro groups that get CIA money.

Are there any anti-Castro groups that DON'T get CIA money? I'm pretty sure that I could move to Miami and get some anti-Castro letterhead printed up and get some CIA money.

Re:should be interesting

[MachineShedFred]

There's a reason why Sweden has one of the highest rape rates in the world

Don't tell Trump! He'll want Norway to build a wall and make the Swedes pay for it!

Re:should be interesting

[Theaetetus]

Ok, I keep hearing "rape" being brought up but, the charge is not quite what it seems. The women in question did not go to the police with charges of sexual assault. One of them discovered that the condom came off, during consensual sex, and after she was unable to locate him, went to the police to locate him for the purpose of taking a STD test.

That'd be the sexual assault charge. The rape charge is from the other situation where he penetrated a woman while she was sleeping, knowing she did not consent, having been explicitly told "no" before she went to sleep. That's the one that the UK courts said "yes, that's rape, even under British law."

Re: should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Uncle Sam probably pays them to lie. Please pay attention to what is going on here. A lot of comments about these stories are no longer average joes with opinions. They are paid trolls used by governments like the US and organized entities to shape public opinion. Times have changed my friend. The Internet we grew up with is gone.

Re:should be interesting

[MachineShedFred]

Typical Conspiracy-nut bullshit.

Of course someone who writes a thesis on what could possibly happen in a post-Castro Cuba absolutely has to be a CIA spy. Especially if she was working for her country in the foreign service of her country at an Embassy.

And really, what anti-Castro group bigger than two or three Cuban exiles with a megaphone don't have CIA funding at some point?

Re: should be interesting

[Type44Q]

You haven't changed your /. username yet?!

Re:should be interesting

[Parafilmus]

The us military released the entire video unedited to discredit and show just how badly edited the file was.

That's not correct.

Wikileaks actually released both videos at the same time, with the edited "short version" clearly labeled as such.

Here is a link to the videos: https://collateralmurder.wikil...

Re: should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Watch your corn-hole, bud.

At this point presumably Assange would settle for a guaranteed stint in Federal Pound-Me-In-The-Ass Prison.

Re:should be interesting

[Parafilmus]

Sweden doesn't have any laws to allow them to lend someone to another country. That goes against both Swedish law and EU law.

Swedish law doesn't allow extraordinary rendition, but that doesn't mean it never happens. Sweden has cooperated with CIA kidnapping on at least one occasion.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2006/...

Re:should be interesting

[Rakarra]

Journalists unfortunately, need to get paid. If, when you are making a feature of some form, and waiting for 20 responses to FOIA - if someone comes along and writes an article on the first 15, you're pretty much screwed, and don't get paid (directly, or your employer) this means less investigative journalism. Journalism is pretty much dying - especially investigative journalism like this.

Spotlight is a fun movie currently out (and currently in the running for the Best Picture Academy Award) where this comes into play. One of the Spotlight reporters working on the Catholic Priest molestation scandal waited in the lobby of the public court records department all night until they opened in the morning because the documents he'd been working on unsealing had just been made public, and he had to get to them before a competitor from the Boston Herald discovered them.

Re:should be interesting

[Coren22]

Is it regret to wake up with a man having sex without a condom when you had previously stated your preference for condom use?

You have a strange definition for regret.

Having sex with a sleeping woman is indeed rape, as she has not given her consent. Sometimes the relationship you have with the woman allows this, but this is a very specific thing.

Re:should be interesting

[Coren22]

Hmm, what evidence do you have for cold fjord's treasonous behavior? Why would cold fjord's treason or lack of treason have any bearing on facts of a case that are very easy to find on your own? You do realize that Snowden who you likely would also defend is a traitor to his country by definition?

Re:should be interesting

[Coren22]

Requirements for having sex before the fact don't magically become changing their mind when they wake to being penetrated by the person without their consent. You are defending a rapist, as defined by the laws in most countries.

Re:should be interesting

[Martin Blank]

Activities after rape should not be used to determine if rape occurred. Some people sit in the corner and cry, some get on with their lives.

Nonconsensual sex is rape. Whether Assange is guilty of it isn't for me (or you) to determine. That's a matter for the courts. There's a lot of blame to go around for how this has been handled.

I respect Assange's determination; I really didn't think he'd last very long before giving up, but he's sticking this out far longer than most believed he would. I also am not opposed to his mission, though it's still pretty one-sided against the US government and some of the things he's claimed have been in cables aren't really what's being said. I'd like to see more from other countries, particularly those in Africa and Asia. Still, I think he's far too stuck on the idea that the Swedes would turn him over to the US government when the UK's extradition treaty is far easier to use, though I don't think he's done anything wrong under US law as he wasn't in the US when he received the information, he's not a US citizen or resident, and he holds no loyalties to the country. Maybe there's an argument for incitement, but that requires some pretty significant proof, and courts (with tons of amici filings by media organizations) may not be keen to agree on that abridgment of free speech. Arguments for damage to national security are similarly thin, especially given the claims of damage in the Pentagon Papers and other

I don't know enough about Swedish law to determine whether the prosecutor could travel to another country for the required interview; I've seen claims that they can or can't, that it's OK under some circumstances but not others. Perhaps it's a point of principle to not do it under circumstances where the accused has such a high degree of control; if he were questioned in the embassy and charges were filed, would he then give up, or would he continue his fugitive status?

Even if Sweden drops the charges (or he waits them out completely), he's not leaving the embassy without getting arrested for bail jumping. He's almost certain to get the maximum sentence (one year) for doing so, and to spend it incarcerated. Once that's finished, I expect he'll be deported to Australia (which I believe also has an easily-implemented extradition treaty with the US), and that relatively few countries will accept him in the future, assuming Australia doesn't revoke his passport. Ecuador might take him in (though the Australian government and those of the nations surrounding Ecuador could make this difficult even if Ecuador did issue travel papers), but that may change with the 2017 elections, since Rafael Correa is term-limited to two terms under the 2008 constitution (he was first elected under that constitution in 2009 and re-elected in 2013).

Whatever happens, it is unlikely that any court, in whatever country, is going to ever grant him bail in the future.

Re: should be interesting

[Martin Blank]

My experience is that this isn't limited to radical conservatives. There are plenty of people on the left that have the same reaction. I think it's innate to humans in general to rebel to being told they're wrong.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

So first you say that it's typical conspiracy bullshit and then you readily acknowledge that it's very likely that her group was CIA funded. Not very sound reasoning. Besides, do you know what exactly she's doing now? Go check it out!

Re:should be interesting

[NotDrWho]

So if he gets off, gets his passport back, then what?

Then he can travel anywhere, in the 20 minutes between takeoff and when the U.S. orders his plane grounded and him taken into custody for extradition to the U.S.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep! Though I would go a step further and say "don't have sex at all." It is a legal, social, and physical minefield.

Some people don't realize just how risky it is. Some examples:

1) you could get murdered, beaten, or otherwise abused by your sex partner.
2) you could get one or more diseases.
3) you could produce an unwanted pregnancy, with potential life-destroying consequences for multiple people.
4) you could be wrongfully accused of rape after the fact.
5) you could accidentally commit rape (depends on your level of self-control, sobriety, and other factors).
6) Your partner may be underage and lie about (see the prior point about accidental rape).
7) Your partner may be married, and the spouse might come after you for vengeance.
8) You might e wrongfully accused of being the parent of someone else's unwanted pregnancy.

There are plenty more, that is just a short and high-level list. These things can and do happen. If you are going to have sex, you are definitely taking your chances.

Re:should be interesting

[F.Ultra]

Depends on what crime you are suspected of since the maximum penalty that could be set by a court if you where absent from the hearings where 3 months jail time before 2014-07-01 (at which point the maximum penalty was increased to 6 months). Considering that the maximum penalty for the charges against Assange is 6 years I don't think that the prosecutor will settle for 6 months...

There is also a clause to the law that says that you can only be charged in absentia if the case can be "investigated in a satisfactory way" by the prosecutor. I guess that the prosecutor in the Assange case does not see it as satisfactory that she cannot extradite him.

Re:should be interesting

[Rakarra]

By your logic that would mean that abuse happens anytime a person changes their mind.

Anyone could 'change their mind' and storm out and accuse someone they were with with rape. Making breakfast the next day isn't really indicative of things one way or the other.

Re:should be interesting

[Parafilmus]

But that doesn't stop Sweden from 'losing' prisoners at the airport just about where the CIA goons with a private jet are waiting to ship the said prisoners to Egypt for some rubber hose cryptanalysis.

Why was this modded down?

It seems like a fair description of an actual event.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
https://www.hrw.org/news/2006/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re: should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Luckily that doesn't affect most people on /.

Re:should be interesting

[NicBenjamin]

Citation needed.

If you'll recall the original Swedish Prosecutor actually declined to press charges, then the famous Marriane Ny over-ruled him. The appeal of the original decision was filed by the victims. Or, to quote wikipedia:
"The preliminary investigation concerning suspected rape was discontinued by Finné on 25 August,[7] but two days later Claes Borgström, the attorney representing the two women, requested a review of the prosecutor's decision to terminate part of the investigation.[7][10]"

Re:should be interesting

[NicBenjamin]

How did this get +5?

There is no such thing as "Federal authorities" in Sweden. The only authorities are agents of the National government, which is not a Federation. There has been no evidence provided by anyone that US Authorities are involved.

As far as the "it's not rape outside of Sweden" claim, here's what Assange's own lawyer said in British Court:
"Assange had stopped her from doing by holding her arms and bending her legs open and trying to penetrate her with his penis without using a condom. [She] says that she felt about to cry since she was held down and could not reach a condom and felt this could end badly."

So he admitted to fucking a woman who was fighting him so hard he had to hold her arms back, and physically force her legs open.

Re:should be interesting

[93 Escort Wagon]

I think your wording was perfect! For my purposes, anyway...

Re:should be interesting

[nanospook]

Maybe he was crazy horny at the time?

Re: should be interesting

[Z00L00K]

Assange is not really of interest anymore. The credibility is damaged. His 15 minutes of fame is over unless he pulls someting really big.

And the CIA and FBI would probably do best by leaving him alone. If they hunt him then they prove his credibility.

Re: should be interesting

[Noah Haders]

i think they would love to teach him a lesson and make an example out of him. give him some orange pajamas and a one way ticket to Guantanamo.

Re:should be interesting

[0111 1110]

Having sex with a sleeping woman is indeed rape, as she has not given her consent.

Nope. The one does not necessarily follow from the other. I personally know a girl who asked her boyfriend to have sex with her after she fell asleep. That seems like consent to me. She can give her consent at any time before she actually goes to sleep. The fact of her sleeping does not preclude consent.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

>> So if he gets off, ...

> Wasn't that what got him into this mess to start with?

Yeah, very funny, but we all know this is the best they could find against him. And we also know what makes they hate him: he told us what they were doing.

Now, if they needed, they would imprison him for life for selling cookies without a license.

He's already in prison, costing more in surveillance and less in food.

Re: should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

You need to allow for inflation

Re:should be interesting

[Applehu Akbar]

Regret as in, "I could have done better."

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

The rape charge is from the other situation where he penetrated a woman while she was sleeping, knowing she did not consent, having been explicitly told "no" before she went to sleep.

The police documents has leaked (of course) and I happen to read Swedish fairly well, and what you say here gives the impression that the woman said no to sex. Not the case. She said she wanted him to use a condom, which he (reluctantly) did. Then they fell asleep. In the morning he initiated sex, and after a while she asked if he was "wearing something". When he admitted he didn't she thought "oh well" and continued having sex with him. But later she started thinking... what if he as an STD or I get pregnant.

Neither of these things seems to have happened (I suppose we would have know about it by now).

He clearly did something wrong, but rape...?

If we put anything that involves sex in that category we end up with rape meaning nothing special. Like girl says: "I've been raped", friend answers: "So what?, everyone does every now and then".

Re:should be interesting

[david_thornley]

Sweden's laws don't actually affect the UK reaction to the extradition request. In order for the UK to comply, the UK has to recognized the alleged actions as illegal b UK law, and Assange appealed that all the way up. According to the highest UK court, the actions described in the request would be rape in the UK.

Re:should be interesting

[david_thornley]

The Swedes issued an Interpol extradition request, which needs to contain the information about what Assange is accused of. The UK court system has confirmed that the UK would consider what he is accused of doing as rape.

And what is that weird law? According to the extradition treaty between Sweden and the UK, Sweden may not ship him off to any other country without UK permission. The whole idea that some US authorities want to snatch Assange seems to have been made up out of paranoia, since I've seen no support for it, and I'm not quite paranoid enough to think that a lack of support means it obviously has to be true.

Re:should be interesting

[david_thornley]

That happened once, and it caused a political backlash. I see no reason Sweden would cooperate.

Why "rubber-hose cryptanalysis"? Why cryptanalysis at all? I thought the key to the entire tarball had been revealed.

And why would the US care? They convicted Manning of leaking the information, and it's legal in the US to disseminate classified information you were handed, as long as you haven't been cleared for such information.

Re:should be interesting

[david_thornley]

From what I've read, that incident is why Sweden isn't going to do it again.

Even in the unlikely happenstance that the US actually wants him.

Re: should be interesting

[david_thornley]

Snowden is guilty of releasing government secrets that he had legitimate access to. The legal reasoning is a bit twisted, but it would be legal for me to disseminate classified information, since I never agreed not to, and so my First Amendment rights take precedence. Snowden deliberately accepted that his leak would be a serious crime. So did Manning.

Assange did nothing illegal by US law, which probably means the US isn't after him, which is presumably why there's no evidence the US is after him.

Re: should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Except it wouldn't be federal, it'd be black bag secret pound you in the face and genitals with an electrified steel cable prison.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

so you think he should be detained illegally? that's not something most people would support I think

Re: should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Lol, beta. Have fun raising my dna you tool

Re:should be interesting

[Jack Griffin]

Not all feminists believe the way you seem to think they do. That says more about you than them, unfortunately, and it's not good for you.

Actually it say more about you, since he never said "all" feminists.
Just like when I say 'the football fans went nuts and caused a riot', it doesn't mean every single person in the world who has ever watched football caused a riot.

Re:should be interesting

[Jack Griffin]

Activities after rape should not be used to determine if rape occurred.

Since when is less information better than more information when determining the truth?

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

then the famous Marriane Ny over-ruled him

Overruled her, the original prosecutor was also female.

The appeal of the original decision was filed by the victims

No, the appeal was filed by their lawyer at the time, someone quite close to Ny politically, and with an agenda of his own, who subsequently was fired by the alleged victims because of this.

Re:should be interesting

[AK Marc]

I don't have the time or interest to look up, but I've seen posted on previous Assange articles a long list of people that were interviewed via phone, or via Swedish representatives overseas. I've not seen anything that explains the unequal treatment, so it seems like special circumstances designed to extradite Assange, not prosecute the crimes he's accused of.

Re:should be interesting

[MobyDisk]

Oh no, clickbait has come to comments, not just headlines? lol

"Do you know what [your spouse | your children | Donald Trump | Julian Assange's mistress] is doing now? Go check it out!"
Worse-yet, is someone will start moderating these kinds of posts as +1 Insightful even though they make absolutely no point at all.

Re:should be interesting

[TangoMargarine]

Of anyone around here, coldfjord is probably the least likely to commit the legal definition of treason.

If by "treason" you mean "betraying some notion of the people of this country, rather than the country itself," you're using a nonstandard definition.

Re:should be interesting

[Martin Blank]

If the response after the sexual activity is to get up, put clothes back on, head out, and pretend that nothing happened, that doesn't mean that rape didn't happen. The only point at issue is if consent was given (and it can be implied by activity). If consent was not given, it's rape.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Found this comment in the discussion about your linked article...

Wow you left out a sentence in that quote of what was said [...]

YOU PUBLISHED:
Assange wanted to insert his penis into her vagina directly, which she did not want since he was not wearing a condom she therefore tried to turn her hips and squeeze her legs together in order to avoid a penetration

THE ARTICLE ACTUALLY SAYS:
Assange wanted to insert his penis into her vagina directly, which she did not want since he was not wearing a condom >>She did not articulate this.

FURTHER THE ARTICLE GOES ON TO SAY:
But crucially, Emmerson said, there was no lack of consent sufficient for the unlawful coercion allegation, because "after a while Assange asked what AA was doing and why she was squeezing her legs together. AA told him that she wanted him to put a condom on before he entered her. Assange let go of AA's arms and put on a condom which AA found her."

Re:should be interesting

[F.Ultra]

Here is a link to the Swedish Bar Association regarding the law change from 3 months to 6 months, perhaps you can Google Translate it from Swedish to English: https://www.advokatsamfundet.s...

People who claim that it never happens are clearly lying but it's true that it's a very uncommon thing to do, either way I highly doubt that the refusal to handle this via phone or representation has anything to do with the USA, if the US would like to snatch him they could just as easily do so during the time he was living in public in the UK when he was fighting the extradition to Sweden. This whole US conspiracy feels way to complicated to be true.

Re: should be interesting

[radarskiy]

23% of anti-Castro groups are actually fronts for Castro, and the money is used to fund the Cuba government budget. Any surplus is used to subsidize low rum prices.

Re:should be interesting

[Jack Griffin]

If the response after the sexual activity is to get up, put clothes back on, head out, and pretend that nothing happened, that doesn't mean that rape didn't happen. The only point at issue is if consent was given (and it can be implied by activity). If consent was not given, it's rape.

What if the "victim" wrote on their facebook page afterwards, "that was the best night ever, I loved every minute of it". This would not be useful in determining consent?
The statement "Activities after rape should not be used to determine if rape occurred" is just wrong. All information should be available to determine the facts.

Re:should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Your alias says a lot about you too, unfortunately, and it's not good for you.

Re: should be interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

which is presumably why there's no evidence the US is after him.

You keep repeating that, but it is not true. http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/mar/05/us-government-still-hunting-wikileaks-obama-targets-whistleblowers

Re: should be interesting

[david_thornley]

Thank you for the reference.

There is no evidence the US is currently after Assange. This may change, but the fact that there is an ongoing investigation suggests that the US is going to play this one by the rules for now.

Shit

[no-body]

Poor guy - shitty "authorities"...

Re:Shit

[no-body]

Shitty guy, really.

Well, by my measures, he got framed and the whole show is staged by "hidden forces" who pull strings in a plutocracy - tsk tsk, don't do this - hit your fingers with a ruler..

Old fashioned teaching manners, won't change things, just makes them worse.

A story comes to mind:

Walking alone up in the mountains, a herd of elks like 200 or so are spread out on a meadow. I come out of the woods, the whole herd starts running away. If they were going against me - fat chance...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Re:Shit

[Richard_at_work]

How is the UK acting "shitty" here? He was allowed legal representation, allowed to appeal his case to the highest court in the land, lost at each level with each judge giving a detailed reasoning to each of his legal teams arguments, and he still went on to commit a crime in the UK. Regardless of how Swedens case is ruled on, there is no way the UKs actions can be considered unlawful in this instance - Assange jumped bail. His bail sponsors already lost their case to have the money back, so Assange is facing an open and shut case should he surrender to the UK authorities.

Re:Shit

[Anonymous Coward]

Violating a judges orders tends to be a pretty good way to have a bad time.

Re:Shit

[Richard_at_work]

No, skipping bail is illegal in the UK, especially after the extradition warrant against you is found to be 100% valid and legal. The rest of the legal case is Swedens, the bit ruled on by the UK passes UK law just fine.

Re:Shit

[Anonymous Coward]

> How is the UK acting "shitty" here?

Remember: acting shitty and acting legally are, alas, not mutually exclusive.

While the "state of law" is a huge advance wrt tyranny, law (especially this hypercomplex law shaped by many interest groups we have these days) bends more readily to those in (financial, political) power.

Sometimes the only (meaningful, I don't believe violence cuts it long term) weapon we have is calling foul: they may have good attorneys, but they still are assholes.

Re:Shit

[Anonymous Coward]

You are assuming that all the laws involved are good and just. You assert that people working on behalf of the British government are acting lawfully, and I don't debate this. However, the original assertion that these people are acting "shitty" remains unchallenged.

Re:Shit

[AmiMoJo]

I'd suggest that the UK court didn't properly weigh the risk to Assange of being extradited to Sweden. The circumstances were suspicious and his fears not unfounded.

I'm surprised he is considering leaving the embassy. Presumably he thinks that the chance of being rendered for torture is now receding.

Re:Shit

[Anonymous Coward]

No, he's just frightened he hasn't seen his name in the papers for a while.

Re:Shit

[MrL0G1C]

Silly fecker doesn't get it, these people make up the laws as they go along, yes they are written down but the point is - they have a tendency to interpret the law however they want to, whether or not you win depends on how authoritarian the judge is.

^ This applies to unique cases, in cases where the same ground has been trodden a thousand times before, you can know what to expect.

Re:Shit

[peragrin]

You like many others confuse Swedish law and English common law. In Sweden you can't be charged in absentia. That means to even have charges applied against you have to be I front of a judge.

Those same charges can only be dismissed by a judge.

He will be in Sweden for 6 hours of which 2 will be be spent waiting for the next flight out, and 2 more for driving around town

Lastly Sweden extradition to the USA is and always has been several order more difficult than from the uk. Sweden won't extradition people to countries with the death penalty.

These facts have never changed.

Re:Shit

[Anonymous Coward]

Whipslash, if you're listening, this is why we need "+0 WTF Did I Just Read?"

Re:Shit

[AmiMoJo]

The US grabs people off the street in Europe. In fact a bunch of CIA operatives were busted in Spain a few years back trying to do exactly that, because they leaked phone metadata (oh, the irony). They grab people and fly them to other countries.

Re:Shit

[no-body]

How is....

Would the world without Assanges, Snowdans, Chelsea Mannings be a better place where the perverts can do their extraordinary renditions under the umbrella of secrecy in a democratic system with separation of powers - checks and balances remaining unexposed?

Maybe the cops being so hot to "get him when he comes out" should just play a round of basketball with Assange and then all go home...

Re:Shit

[Anonymous Coward]

If they were going to pull that, storming the embassy wouldn't be that much harder. You're a loon.

Re:Shit

[ooloorie]

Remember: acting shitty and acting legally are, alas, not mutually exclusive.

Neither are doing the right thing and acting illegally. Assange leaking documents was arguably doing the right thing. But he probably acted illegally doing so, and hence the US can reasonably charge him and demand his extradition. It is for a US court of law to decide his guilt.

Re:Shit

[no-body]

Some more info - 46' long
http://www.disclose.tv/action/...

Re:Shit

[Foobar of Borg]

You are the piece of shit, scum like you deserves to have their family marched to the gas chamber. State worshipping pig fucker scum!

Butcher all right wingers. We need a civil war. Murder all families of right-wing voters.

What about all the family members who can't stand the right-wing nut in their family? You know, the nut who won't ever shut up about politics. The nut to whom you never speak because he thinks he knows everything and tries to prove you wrong about everything. The nut who actively tries to start arguments. The nut who disowns his own children because they don't share his right-wing politics or follow his psychotic Southern Baptist religion.

Re:Shit

[MachineShedFred]

On display: the tolerance and acceptance of the 'progressives' wanting to replay the worst episodes of the 1940s - political purges involving the execution of people that don't agree with you.

Well done, idiot.

Re:Shit

[MachineShedFred]

It's quite different to grab a guy off the street and stuff him into a van and drive him to a private air strip where you've got a Gulfstream waiting, then it is to "storm" the embassy of a sovereign nation (an act of war) to grab someone.

In diplomatic law, that is invading the country who owns the embassy.

Re:Shit

[gnasher719]

I'd suggest that the UK court didn't properly weigh the risk to Assange of being extradited to Sweden. The circumstances were suspicious and his fears not unfounded.

They properly did. Extradition to Sweden will be a done deal. After he spends some time in a UK jail for jumping bail.

He would probably got a slap on the wrist in the case in Sweden. Instead he voluntarily stayed in his own Ecuadorian jail for six years, is now in trouble in the UK, and any court in Sweden will be much less let him get away with a less severe punishment.

Re:Shit

[Anonymous Coward]

The document leaking wasn't the only illegal thing Assagne did. He also broke other laws, and should be held accountable for them. Having done one service to the greater good doesn't grant one ubiquitous legal immunity.

Re:Shit

[F.Ultra]

Which means that they could have snatched him off the British streets at any time they wanted during the years that he fought the extradition to Sweden in the British courts. And why wait for all this legal stuff to play out when they just could snatch him from a far more US friendly place, CIA would probably not even have to put their own people on the ground to do that since the MI5/6 would more than happily oblige the request.

Re:Shit

[mrchaotica]

Assange leaking documents was arguably doing the right thing. But he probably acted illegally doing so, and hence the US can reasonably charge him and demand his extradition.

THAT'S NOT EVEN WHAT THEY'RE "ALLEGEDLY" TRYING TO EXTRADITE HIM FOR! This fight isn't over Assange being extradited to the US for espionage; this fight is over him being extradited to Sweden for unrelated trumped-up rape charges, and then extraordinarily rendered to the US.

Even if you think he legitimately should be tried for espionage in the US, the CIA's actions are totally indefensible.

Re:Shit

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, in spite of all of the "blame America" bullshit, it's not clear that he's broken any laws, and consequently has not been charged with anything. Unlike many European countries, we have the freedom of the press here. It's possible that, were this a declared war, and he an American citizen or permanent resident, that he could have committed treason, but neither of those cases are met.

Re:Shit

[Rakarra]

You are the piece of shit, scum like you deserves to have their family marched to the gas chamber. State worshipping pig fucker scum!

Butcher all right wingers. We need a civil war. Murder all families of right-wing voters.

I disagree. I think we need more marginalization of people who have watched too many episodes of the X-Files, see spooks in every shadow, and think that anyone who shines a light on something is an alter boy who can't possibly be a douchebag who commits other crimes.

Re:Shit

[Rakarra]

If they were going to pull that, storming the embassy wouldn't be that much harder. You're a loon.

Oh, it's totally possible, I saw an episode of 24 where he stormed a Chinese embassy and did just that.

Re:Shit

[Rakarra]

"He" being Jack Bauer, of course. Of course that didn't end up well of ol' Jack either -- captured by the Chinese in retaliation and held for years in China.

Re:Shit

[no-body]

Some more info - 46' long
http://www.disclose.tv/action/...

Pretty thorough documentation - Grand Jury in the US, Sweden going back and forth: "That's how things work in Sweden", he played along but the whole matter sure has a "secret drive" pushing it in a direction. The all-present argument is Security in danger.... who is endangering depends on viewpoint, as always...

Re:Shit

[david_thornley]

I've seen no evidence that Assange violated US law, or that the US government wants to charge him or do anything else to him. Assange may have violated Swedish law (that's what the trial is for) and certainly violated UK law.

Re:Shit

[david_thornley]

Where did you get the completely ridiculous belief that the US would let something like diplomatic protocol and treaty obligations stop them? The US had no problems with violating other countries' sovereignity to get Snowden. (Well, the government didn't. Some of us citizens disagree.)

Re:Shit

[ooloorie]

I've seen no evidence that Assange violated US law, or that the US government wants to charge him or do anything else to him.

I have no particular opinion on it either way; this from the BBC, though: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...

Despite the US not having made an extradition request, US Attorney General Eric Holder has previously said American officials were pursuing a "very serious criminal investigation" into the matter.

My point is that it's not inconsistent to believe that what Assange did was useful, while at the same time believing that the US could legitimately extradite him from Sweden for a trial if US prosecutors actually wanted to charge him. In different words, a courageous and useful act of civil disobedience shouldn't result in people being able to claim freedom from legal prosecution.

Re:Shit

[ooloorie]

this fight is over him being extradited to Sweden for unrelated trumped-up rape charges, and then extraordinarily rendered to the US.

That's just Assange's conspiracy theory, not actual fact.

In reality, the US could simply ask the UK to extradite Assange; they wouldn't need to cook up some complicated scheme of having him charged in Sweden. He got charged with rape in Sweden because Sweden has stupid rape laws, he slept around there with the wrong women, and the whole thing irritated a prosecutor. That's all.

Even if you think he legitimately should be tried for espionage in the US, the CIA's actions are totally indefensible.

There are lots of CIA actions that are "indefensible". But, then, the same can be said for MI5 and BND.

However, I'm not aware of the CIA actually having done anything to Assange in particular.

Re:Shit

[MachineShedFred]

Because if you send a military unit crashing through an embassy showing that you have absolutely zero respect for diplomatic law, it opens up the hundreds of embassies and consulates that the US Department of State has scattered across the globe to similar.

The people in charge might be completely corrupt chucklefucks, but they do actually think about some of this shit before they do it.

Re:Shit

[david_thornley]

Who said "military"? It would be US government agents of some sort with no connection to the US, who'd be out of the country before anyone could react. It's not like the US didn't do things nearly as bad over Snowden with less plausible deniability.

Re:Shit

[david_thornley]

We couldn't legitimately extradite him from Sweden, since Sweden is not legally allowed to send him anywhere except back to the UK without UK consent.

As far as the Holder quote goes, the BBC article is from nearly a year ago, and has a reference to a statement Holder made earlier. Since publishing classified material is legal in the US (IIRC, that was determined in the 1960s Pentagon Papers case), the investigation would presumably be to investigate whether Assange cooperated in Manning's leaking. I hadn't seen this before (thanks for bringing it up), but it isn't a clear and present danger.

Re:Shit

[Anonymous Coward]

As I was saying, I don't have an opinion on how likely it is that the US would want to extradite him from anywhere. All I'm saying is that I think it's perfectly OK for the US to attempt to do so if it wanted to.

Re:Shit

[rtb61]

Seriously how ingenious can you be. It is for the American courts to shut the fuck up and mind their own business. The only court with any jurisdictions is the British court for jumping bail and the Swedish court for the claimed cases. However both legal systems should be held liable for their purposeful corruption of the legal system in order to pander to NATO and the US government. The Australian diplomatic service should also be held liable for abandoning an Australian citizen to the blatant corruption of the US government.

The US in the most illegal fashion imaginable, in fact for the majority beyond imagining, kidnapped people from all over the world and disappeared them, torturing many to death in the process, and then the few survivors were illegal held at a base seized from the Cuban people with the threat of total annihilate them, should the Cuban people make any attempt to recover the illegal seized land.

It is up to US courts to end the stupendous corruption within the US three level legal system, rich, middle class, poor. It is up to the US courts to end blatant political corruption of those courts in all levels with hugely corrupt appointees. It is up to US courts to fuck off and stick the fucking mess in their own country and leave the rest of the world alone.

Re:Shit

[david_thornley]

If we have a legitimate charge against him, then it's fine to make an extradition request. In this case, the US would just have to get in line.

Don't worry.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence."
- John 18:36 (KJV)

Re:Don't worry.

[Anonymous Coward]

What an ironic use of that iconic verse.

Assange went about this all wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

1) Claim asylum in Russia.

2) Menage a trois with Snowden and his lover.

3) Pressure from conservative Russians to have them imprisoned for being bum-boys.

4) Putin knows they're too good a fuck-you to the West to bring to harm.

5) Putin, bareback, rides horse, bareback, into Snowden+Assange love shack, figuring that if you can't beat 'em, beat 'em off.

6) Homosexuality in Russia decriminalised.

7) Oligarchs no longer have blackmailable closet secrets on Putin, so he purges them and renationalises the commanding heights of the economy.

8) Putin is more popular than ever.

9) Putin renationalises everything else and rebuilds Soviet command structures.

10) Finland figures it won't get lucky a second time and finally applies to join NATO.

11) Putin pre-emptively overruns Finland and founds a new Union of Soviert Socialist Republics comprising Russia and Finland.

12) Stallman is invited to visit Putin, who is keen to implement a single People's Licence for all Soviet intellectual property, and ends up choosing GPL 3.0. Putin makes Stallman an honorary Russian bear, sealing the deal in his Kremlin bedroom.

13) Torvalds is kidnapped and repatriated to Finland, where he is forced to direct a Russian musical based on Stallman's "The Free Software Song".

Eh my cat's just jumped on my lap I'm tired now.

Re: Assange went about this all wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

Better keep it away from the backspace if you don't your Linux to accidently get rooted by your own cat..

Re:Assange went about this all wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

Only a Finn would create such a depressing joke.

Re:Assange went about this all wrong.

[aglider]

Forget about all that.
...
42) Assange gets a brand new bullet opening his third eye as soon as his head gets out of the embassy.
Easy!

Re: Assange went about this all wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, cut the guy some slack. It must be hard to be a stormtrooper, always getting shot in the abdomen and stuff.

Re:Assange went about this all wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

LOOOOOLLLLL were are my mod points when someone really deserves them. Well played sir, well played

Re:Assange went about this all wrong.

[dcollins117]

42) Assange gets a brand new bullet opening his third eye as soon as his head gets out of the embassy.

I've just realized I honestly don't trust my government not to do that. There was a time I did. I've just seen too many cases of government officials feeling (or actually being) unconstrained by the Constitution and rule of law to believe that they won't disappear/torture/kill Assange. That's depressing, actually.

Re:Assange went about this all wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

I trust that most government agencies are smart enough to know that shooting Assange gives fuel to all his idiotic claims by confirming one of them. The most effective way to destroy Assange is to treat him like any other fugitive of Swedish justice for non-violent (but in one case aggressive) crimes.

I do not trust certain heads of certain states to listen to the advisers who point out the obvious.

Re:Assange went about this all wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

I threw an extra one on for you.

Re:Assange went about this all wrong.

[aglider]

Just remember to ask the shooter to yell some Islamic sentence.

Voluntarily leaving or being kicked out?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems like Ecuador finally got sick of him.

Re:Voluntarily leaving or being kicked out?

[TheReaperD]

They can kick him out anytime they want. He has no right to be there.

Re: Voluntarily leaving or being kicked out?

[Augury]

Not really - http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/... (sorry for mobile link)

Ecuador has said Mr Assange is welcome to remain in its London embassy should he please.

"It's a personal decision. We've given him protection and of course it is still in place. The basis on which we granted him asylum remains in place," Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino said.

Re: Voluntarily leaving or being kicked out?

[Augury]

Not really - http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/... (sorry for mobile link)

Ecuador has said Mr Assange is welcome to remain in its London embassy should he please.

"It's a personal decision. We've given him protection and of course it is still in place. The basis on which we granted him asylum remains in place," Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino said.

Rock and hard place

[Anonymous Coward]

Must be crap to be holed up in an embassy for so long (essentially in gaol) - still, I hope he knows what he's doing - I'm sure the US government is salivating at the thought of finally getting their hands on him.

Really? That's All It Takes?

[Greyfox]

"Oh, sure! Suuuure! We'll stop trying to arrest you! Why don't you come out of that embassy there and... give it a try?" And for some reason I totally hear that in Brock Samson's voice.

And also, "You guys might want to think about, ah... febreezing that embassy of yours there... it smells like moldy pizza and... Assange crotch."

Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

Surely, the UN will find Assange guilty of rape* for having consensual sex without a condom after having drinks.

* Rape in Sweden makes no sense and is vaguely applied depending on circumstance and whether or not you leaked US intelligence troves.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

Rape is such a serious allegation that sometimes things that aren't quite rape are rape.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. Rape is different and should be handled differently.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

Just great. Since reddit is down, all of the SJWs are here.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Falconhell]

Ah well, at least there's a whiny AC to make it better.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

It wasn't without one. It broke thus making the intercource nonconsensual.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

It is different except to those that hate women.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

Rape is when dick go into the dark alleys of butt, man. Dick in ass shitface, that be only rape I know. You wanna get raped true Swedish (heja Sverige!) way? Well you just put some dick in ass, douchebag.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you the Swedish attorney general?

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[TheReaperD]

The charge has never been rape. That's just the way it has been reported in the media. The "crime" he is charged with in Sweden has no equivalent in the UK or US and the woman was pressured into making it by the police once they figured out who the complaint was against. She only wanted a STD test done.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

It is different except to those that hate women.

The woman that he was claimed to have raped has said repeatedly for years that she was not raped. Must have been the internalized misogyny talking.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Richard_at_work]

If the "crime" had no equivalent in the UK, then Assange would have easily won his case in the UK at the very first court hearing, as the concept of "dual criminality" is paramount when it comes to extradition warrants and UK law - you cannot be extradited from the UK if the charge you are to be extradited for is not a crime in the UK, and on all the charges on the extradition warrant against Assange the requirement of dual criminality was satisfied.

It is amusing to see in these threads those people who actually know nothing about the facts of the extradition case against Assange.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

False rape accusations are such a serious problem that sometimes people have to use their brains and examine the evidence before claiming someone is a rapist.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

When women divorce men and kick them out of the homes they paid for and try to pillage his bank accounts, this makes the marriage nonconsensual and all claims for alimony to be null and void, right?

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems you are new here.

It's called "governments abusing their power to silence a critic."

it's also why it will fail and why he will probably end up dead in a ditch somewhere at a later date because the guvmint got butthurt.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

You talk like you believe that the law has anything to do with what happens when the US says "jump".

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

uh. Sorry no he did not.

Where are you getting this misinformation from?

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Theaetetus]

The charge has never been rape. That's just the way it has been reported in the media. The "crime" he is charged with in Sweden has no equivalent in the UK or US and the woman was pressured into making it by the police once they figured out who the complaint was against. She only wanted a STD test done.

You keep saying this, and people keep pointing out that penetrating a sleeping woman without her consent, after she's told you "no", is rape in not just Sweden, but both the UK, and the US (not that the latter is relevant). At some point will you admit that fact?

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Rakarra]

The charge has never been rape

The charge has been rape. You're thinking about the woman he was having sex with when the condom came off. You're correct, that was not charged as rape, at least not what us brit/americans would think of as "rape."

The rape charge comes from a different woman. The two women are identified as "Miss A" and "Miss W." I couldn't find documents online of who made which charge, but it doesn't really matter. Assange is accused of continuing to have sex with one of the women after a condom came off after she'd agreed to have sex if he wore a condom. The other woman accused him of having sex with her while she was asleep (no consent) after telling him she would not have sex with him. Neither of them went to the police until they'd talked to each other about these encounters.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[david_thornley]

If this was a "US says 'jump'" case, the US would have filed an extradition request first and gotten the UK to send Assange over. The US government is neither so committed to plans that Agatha Christie would have found implausible, nor so respecting of international law, as any of the conspiracy theories suggest.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

Having sex with a sleeping woman is indeed rape

Now, I understand this is Slashdot, and most of you have never had a relationship, but what you believe is quite ridiculous. Waking up the partner you went to bed with the night before with some foreplay and having sex afterwards is not 'rape'. Not the same ballpark, not the same league, not the same fucking sport.

Just a yesterday I was woken up by a Ms. Anonymous giving me head. Should I have called the cops instead of enjoying it?

a sleeping woman without her consent, after she's told you "no"

Wait, how did she say 'no' if she was asleep? Does she talk in her sleep? There are no 'facts' here, just hearsay. The facts are that they went to bed willingly, and that she made him breakfast the next day.

Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law...

[Anonymous Coward]

The 'rape' charge is not by one of the women, it is by the second prosecutor, who picked up the case. The second prosecutor, Marianne Ny decided to read a rewrite of the complaint by a lawyer with an agenda (who was at the time representing the women, but was subsequently fired because they felt he didn't properly defend their interests) of the account of what transpired between Assange and one of the women as 'rape', but for it to become a 'rape' she has to prove it in court, something she is still pretty far away from. The UK courts support the extradition not because they believe 'rape' is what happened, but because the charges of the EAW, suitably trumped up by the obviously politically motivated Marianne Ny count as 'rape' in the UK.

Set up a sniper

[Anonymous Coward]

The cia can handle this for what he's done.

Re:Set up a sniper

[Anonymous Coward]

What, shoot his cock off? Bit harsh, he hasn't even faced trial yet.

Re:Set up a sniper

[Anonymous Coward]

AFAIK he hasn't even been questioned let alone charged. I think a trial is way over thinking it.

Shooting the messenger.

[shanen]

Actually, I don't think they will shoot Assange immediately. I think he will disappear into a black hole of some sort, unless they can use him for a show trial a la Stalin. Doesn't even matter anymore what he did. What matters is putting the fear of gawd into anyone else who is thinking of doing something that causes similar embarrassment to sufficiently rich and powerful people.

As regards the comments here, I'm not at all surprised to see the attacks on Assange. I just wonder why are they such big fans of corporate secrecy and government secrecy? (Same thing now, given our corporatist overlords.)

Occam's Razor says they are shills, probably professional abusers of your privacy, and mine.

Secrecy and anonymity are funny things, but it's a tough philosophic topic. On principle, I think that secrecy is wrong, because the truth is eventually going to come out, but it turns out to be quite easy to justify anonymity in terms of prior secret crimes and the anonymity of the perpetrators... No reason to protect the whistle-blowers if the crimes were already known to the public, eh?

However, the criminals are not worrying about eventually. They just want to die with the most toys. Their planning horizons are limited to statutes of limitations or death. Preferably the whistle-blower's death.

Any trace of privacy will soon be the ultimate luxury good. The rest of us peasants will be naked on the podium, with all our weaknesses and mistakes well known and used as sticks to threaten and control us. However, that's only the half of it. Our interests, tastes, and even our strengths will be used to manipulate and control us, too.

Returning to Assange, I actually think it was his taste in women that was used to set him up. I would say he's losing his freedom for being a sucker, but he actually lost his freedom years ago.

Re:Shooting the messenger.

[MichaelSmith]

I think he will disappear into a black hole of some sort

Not sure thats possible with the story all over the Internet.

Re:Shooting the messenger.

[TheReaperD]

Actually, I think that is one of the reasons he tries so hard to stay in the media spotlight, the other being his ego, is that he knows that he can be "disappeared" as soon as the cameras are off.

Re:Shooting the messenger.

[shanen]

Want to wager on it? We need some metric of disappearance, but I think it is absolutely safe to say the story will not last as long as Snowden's.

As regards the anonymous and spineless fascist who gave my comment the overrated mod: You're supposed to wait for it to get a mod point. You're only showing your willingness to abuse the rules, such as they are.

The troll question is actually related to this topic via their abuse of anonymity, but it is again philosophically complicated. I think "troll" is actually a multidimensional concept. Since I think the dimensions of evaluating comments (and their authors) should be defined as positive axes that allow for negative values, I'm going to word it in those terms. For example, if there were a dimension of "sincerity", I think most trolls are negative, though there are few who are lying to themselves, too. Most trolls are negative on the dimensions of "constuctive", "supportive", and "friendly", but not always at the same time.

There is a flip side, however. Sometimes trolls can be "stimulating", but I see that as a dimension that should be split out of the currently ambiguous "interesting" dimension. Right now "interesting" fuzzily seems to include "stimulating" and "well written" and several other matters of opinion. They can't even translate it cleanly into Japanese (on the Japanese slashdot), which reminds me of something Dijkstra said about translation. Paraphrasing, but something like 'If I can't translate a new idea to my other language in a natural and straightforward way, then that is strong evidence there is something wrong with the idea.' (Pretty sure I heard him say it live before I left Austin.)

Re:Shooting the messenger.

[shanen]

Why did this part of that last reply trigger the so-called lameness filter:

Now about that meta-modding thing. Years since I had noticed it, and it's just as stupid as it ever was. To evaluate the moderation of a comment, to form ANY meaningful opinion about the moderation, I need CONTEXT. Maybe I'm doing it wrong, but I don't feel like searching in other tabs to see the rest of the thread and the moderation itself is worth the effort, and without the effort, any meta-moderation is worthless. I should have looked for that in the recent discussion of slashdot's future... Make that "possible future".

Now that is truly bizarre. I cut and pasted the last bit into this new comment so I could figure out which word or words were problematic, but in isolation, there is apparently no problem. I think that is sufficient evidence of the importance of context, eh?

Re:Shooting the messenger.

[Anonymous Coward]

Occam's Razor says they are shills, probably professional abusers of your privacy, and mine.

I'm not sure that means what you think it means.

Re:Shooting the messenger.

[AmiMoJo]

Well, we know that GCHQ has a large programme dedicated to altering public opinion on the internet, and has targeted Slashdot in the past with both shills and malware. Thanks to Snowden's leaks we have documentary evidence that they were serving people Slashdot pages laced with custom malware.

So when there are stories about Assange and Snowden, I tend to assume many of the accounts that come out of the woodwork to comment are just GCHQ shills trying to screw with us.

Re:Shooting the messenger.

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh shut up. You want total privacy for yourself and no secrets for governments and corporations.You are living in a bubble.

Re:Shooting the messenger.

[ooloorie]

What matters is putting the fear of gawd into anyone else who is thinking of doing something that causes similar embarrassment to sufficiently rich and powerful people.

Assange's revelations embarrassed the US government and the US military, not "rich people". And you're right: the purpose of a trial and conviction is to act as a deterrent.

Returning to Assange, I actually think it was his taste in women that was used to set him up. I would say he's losing his freedom for being a sucker, but he actually lost his freedom years ago.

I really don't know whether Assange is guilty of anything under US law, or whether Sweden should have an obligation to extradite people like him to the US, or whether the rape accusations against him are valid or not. What I dislike intensely about Assange and his defenders is that they try to make a special case out of him because they like the particular documents that he leaked. That's wrong.

Re:Shooting the messenger.

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Perhaps over-use of the word "troll"?

Re:Shooting the messenger.

[gnasher719]

And you're right: the purpose of a trial and conviction is to act as a deterrent.

He'll get a trial in the UK with the purpose of convicting him for jumping jail for six years. Hasn't got a chance there, just a little bit too much evidence. Then he'll get a trial in Sweden with the purpose of finding out if he raped or sexually assaulted a woman or not. Nobody knows how this will end.

Re:Shooting the messenger.

[shanen]

Assange's revelations embarrassed the US government and the US military, not "rich people".

You must be new around here. What planet did you come from?

I'm not particularly interested in Assange or those specific documents. I'm intensely interested in why people like you (or the role you are pretending to play, perhaps as a paid shill) want the government to have MORE control what LITTLE you know. They are obviously already doing a sufficiently good job.

Re:Shooting the messenger.

[ooloorie]

I'm intensely interested in why people like you (or the role you are pretending to play, perhaps as a paid shill) want the government to have MORE control what LITTLE you know.

In fact, I believe strongly that the government should have less control of what I know and that the power of government should be greatly reduced.

Instead, people like you vent your outrage, demand special deals for media-savvy personalities, and argue endlessly that if we just elect the right Leader, everything will be better. And that's why I despise people like you: you pretend to be on the side of liberty and freedom, and at the same time, people like you are primarily responsible for the massively increased intrusions of government into our lives.

Re:Shooting the messenger.

[Anonymous Coward]

What's wrong with him wanting that? He's a living person, he's got a right to privacy. Neither governments, nor corporations have a really clear need for 'secrets'. Governments should be accountable to the people who elect them, and as for corporations, they have that 'intellectual property' thing, which oughta be enough to protect them.

Trusting the UN? WHAT THE FUCK?

[jcr]

This is the organization that put the Saud crime family's minions on their "human rights council".

-jcr

Really Sad State of Affairs

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of the comments so far are made by people joking about assassinating Assange. I'm going to assume that these are mostly kids who don't have a clue about the real world and how fucked up things can get.

Just step back for two fucking seconds.

Irrespective of whether Assange is guilty of raping those girls in Finland, in the first instance he deserves a completely fair and open trial.

Second to this, once that matter has been dealt with, he deserves to remain free of US-led persecution. US LAW DOES NOT COVER THE GLOBE!!! Just try to imagine how awful that would be. And I know most of the US is actually thinking this would be pretty sweet and a good deal for them, but just imagine what it would be like it Chinese law was suddenly being applied to men and women out on the street in the US - and if Moscow was joking about murdering a US citizen because he/she had embarrassed them politically.

I know I'm wasting my time and that most of you readers are just bored kids in highschool posting shit for shits and giggles. But why not learn some history and realise how fucked up the US foreign policy has been over the years and how _down-right wrong_ the CIA is.

If a country's government reflects its people, then US citizens are fucking disgusting.

Re:Really Sad State of Affairs

[Anonymous Coward]

Irrespective of whether Assange is guilty of raping those girls in Finland

I think everyone agree that Assange didn't rape those girls in Finland. Even the Swedish Attorney. Finland is on the other side of the Baltic Sea.

Re:Really Sad State of Affairs

[Rei]

Meh, Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Swaziland... what's the difference? ;)

Re:Really Sad State of Affairs

[Anonymous Coward]

Man you Danes are so picky. :)

Re:Really Sad State of Affairs

[Anonymous Coward]

They're all Greek to me!

Re:He's lost his freedom forever

[MichaelSmith]

Well at least we are going to hear the answer to the US extradition theory. Maybe he is hoping to be pardoned by Obama.

Maybe he should not have raped that woman

[Anonymous Coward]

He went to Sweden because he knew they would not send him to the US after the backlash over the renditions. They still won't send him to the US. He is guilty of violating his host country's rape laws and he knows it. You might not think it rape, but the Swedish people do, and they have the right to set laws in their country.

Re:Maybe he should not have raped that woman

[Hognoxious]

but the Swedish people do, and they have the right to set laws in their country.

Unless they infringe on other people's cultural norms and religious beliefs.

It's racist, that.

Re:Maybe he should not have raped that woman

[Anonymous Coward]

but the Swedish people do, and they have the right to set laws in their country.

Unless they infringe on other people's cultural norms and religious beliefs.

It's racist, that.

So Iranians in Sweden are allowed to execute homosexuals?

Saudi Arabians in Sweden are allowed to amputate the hands of criminals?

Pakistanis in Sweden are allowed to force 9-year-old girls into arranged marriages?

Got it.

Re:Maybe he should not have raped that woman

[Anonymous Coward]

By that definition the western nations are infringing on the cultural norms and religious beliefs of 2/3s of the world, and their racists.

Re:Maybe he should not have raped that woman

[Psykechan]

By that definition the western nations are infringing on the cultural norms and religious beliefs of 2/3s of the world, and their racists.

Which group of racists is it that the western nations are infringing upon? Is it their own racists? I think that's allowed and even looked favorably upon. Is it the two thirds of the world which the western nations infringe on their cultural norms, religious beliefs, and apparently their racists as well? No, I think that's still looked favorably upon; at least belittling their racists part.

I just don't get it. I don't think I want to.

Re:Maybe he should not have raped that woman

[hucker75]

Yes. Why should the country you're in change the way you have to behave? They're just lines drawn on the map.

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell us what shit you are smoking, it must be good.

Breaking - "UN panel 'rules in Assange's favour'"

[seoras]

On the BBC just now: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-35490910

He probably had someone "leak" that result prior to his "I'll give myself up on Friday", offer.
As if the UN can change anything...

Prison vs. embassy

[Max_W]

+ In a prison he will walk outdoors every day for an hour.

- In a prison he will have to eat a food and medications which are given to him. So there could be significant personality changes for a ridiculisation.

+ In the embassy he has got the Internet access.

- No outdoors walks whatsoever in the embassy. And it is very hard.

Re: Prison vs. embassy

[Anonymous Coward]

In a prison he might also be stabbed with a shiv in the lower abdomen and left to bleed to death, or strangled in the toilets... Bad stuff happens in prison.

Re:Prison vs. embassy

[Rei]

The prosecutor's office has already announced that there will be no restrictions on his internet access - there's actually a court ruling on that. That's only for people accused of computer crimes who are deemed a high risk of conducting more from prison, and people who are deemed likely to try to interfere with cases against others from within prison.

Betting on how long it is until he is in the USA?

[Required Snark]

Wake up people.

Sweden is just a front for law enforcement in the USA. The entire goal of this disgusting show is to get him on US soil where he will be "disappeared". They can't directly ship him to Gitmo and start the water boarding, but they can do the equivalent without leaving the continental USA.

It will go something like this. First, they will try and stall for a few days and pretend he is still in Swedish custody. In fact, he will already be buried in some black facility in the US. Then, after he can't be found the US will deny that they have him. That will make it much more difficult for his lawyers to force the courts to grant him his basic rights, like the right to an attorney.

This could literally drag on for years. Given that the security courts have, as far as anyone knows, never stopped the authorities from doing whatever the hell they want, it will be like he dropped off the face of the earth.

Meanwhile, he will be tortured. It will be somewhat less physical then Gitmo because they will at some point need to show that he is still breathing and can say a sentence with words of no more then two syllables. But as far as destroying him mentally, they will do whatever they think they can get away with.

The goal is not to find out about the leaks, the goal is to make an example and act out their rage. Make no doubt, these people are perverts in a sexual sense. They derive very intense personal pleasure from the destruction of their enemies. They're seriously deranged.

If he is never seen again then it will be because someone got carried away and killed him. That would not be their plan, but we all know how that actually works out. How many innocent people did they kill looking for Bin Laden? They have admitted less then ten so far, but it seems likely it was in the hundreds or even thousands. Seriously, they killed one person because he was tall and had a beard and was somewhere that was a possible Bin Laden hideout (i.e. somewhere in Iraq or Pakistan or Syria or Lebanon or ...) Once they realized it was some random guy, they just went "oops"and never even bothered to contact his family and take any responsibility. "We wus looking for the bad guy, so suck it up"

So back to the question: how long will it take for him to be "extraordinarily rendered" to the US? There should be a betting pool. A good bet would be that he doesn't even sleep in Sweden. That would leave the smallest footprint for a cover up.

Of course, the real problem with running that pool is that it could take decades to determine the winners. Or there will never be a winner. In some sense a complete disappearance makes it easy, because they want him to be forgotten. That would be a real victory in their eyes.

Re:Betting on how long it is until he is in the US

[Anonymous Coward]

> The goal is not to find out about the leaks, the goal is to make an example and act out their rage. Make no doubt, these people are perverts in a sexual sense. They derive very intense personal pleasure from the destruction of their enemies. They're seriously deranged.

or to put it another way...

" I don't feel I have to wipe everybody out, Tom. Just my enemies."
          - Michael Corleone

UN rules in Assange's favor

[gavron]

Don't expect the authorities to give him back his passport any time ever.

http://www.reuters.com/article...

E

Re:UN rules in Assange's favor

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think he deserves anything but a cell. He fled to Britain and put the whole business through the courts, and then, finding the courts didn't endorse him - and he was the darling of the establishment, so he would have been let off if possible -, he skipped bail and hid in an embassy. He's just an arrogant little toerag, who deserves whatever he gets.

Re:UN rules in Assange's favor

[ooloorie]

Don't expect the authorities to give him back his passport any time ever.

He is Australian. As such, he has no automatic right to enter any other country than Australia.

Re:UN rules in Assange's favor

[thoromyr]

I know, replying to an AC, but your comment is just a little strange.

I don't understand why you would say "he was the darling of the establishment". Is that because the leaks embarrassed the US or UK governments so much that they loved him? Or do you have some pet definition for "the establishment"?

On the other hand, "he's just an arrogant little toerag" seems about spot on. If there really is a US-backed conspiracy to disappear him that is pretty bad, but Assange's mental and emotional stability seem to certainly have arrogance as a component. It reminds me of the saying, "just because they're out to get you doesn't mean your not paranoid".

Re:UN rules in Assange's favor

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually the saying is 'just because your paranoid doesn't mean someone's not out to get you'...it makes far more sense as a pithy comment this way. :-)

Re:UN rules in Assange's favor

[PPH]

Maybe. This will be a demonstration of just how much of a US sock puppet Australia really is.

Re:UN rules in Assange's favor

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't expect the authorities to give him back his passport any time ever.

He is Australian. As such, he has no automatic right to enter any other country than Australia.

Except in the UK apparently - as an Aussie he is a commonwealth citizen, which in the UK, gives him some rights to enter the country and stay for various periods of time.

Does this guy have balls or what?

[Anonymous Coward]

So. Lets get this straight. He gets told somewhere down the line that the UN has classified his "asylum" not really an asylum after all and that a) it took them 3 years to figure this out b) really they just changed the goal posts to include his situation as being "illegal".

And as a response Assange reports it to the press and then plays chicken with the UN in front of the world. Well, Fuck me.

The possible outcome will be this

a) they say "confirmed" and nobody gives a shit, he comes good on it all but segments the ideals of the UN in the process.
b) they say nothing and again nobody gives a shit, he says "Well there! I told you so! Haha!" (or something like that).

But the nobody gives a shit is the biggest problem in my view. Because it's not 100% true its kind of 80% true these days as about 20% of the world has woken up. It is I hope someday going to become 0% and that we can remove these corrupt paper pushing time wasters from official offices around the world and replace them with people who understand the concept of "ideals".

As a footnote. The UN has not been the most gracious of organisations in recent years, his hopes and prayers would be strong here. It is sad to even consider the UN is doing such things these days little alone needing Assange's fame to help shine a light on all of this.

Loksins

[Rei]

Thank YHVH that this expensive ego-driven sideshow will (theoretically) be ending. :P

Re:Breaking - "UN panel 'rules in Assange's favour

[Rei]

It's changed one thing: the fact that he said he'll leave the embassy if they rule against him.

Of course, if Assange is known for anything these past few years it's "keep the focus on me" stunts. Remember the time when he said he'd be leaving the embassy "very soon"? Held a press conference and everything.

Re:Betting on how long it is until he is in the US

[Viol8]

"Sweden is just a front for law enforcement in the USA."

Hey yankee, when you've actually travelled more than 10 miles from where you were born and have a clue about life outside your tin foil lined basement and hick town, then maybe get back to us with some slightly less ignorant opinions.

Re: Good

[Anonymous Coward]

Try to counter any of the points I made. You can not. You can only make up snide remarks which cannot hide the truth: nerds have lost. And thanks to the Gamergate fiasco, nerds are now branded as misogynists and would-be rapists. In one single stroke, the whole of the "gamer" subculture has been wiped away. This is the power of the Real World, losers.

Sure!

[aglider]

This is why they use to book an entire airplane to bring people to the USA.
He'll surely meet some high-rank official who responds to the PotUSA...
Obama's people is REALLY looking forward to talk to Julian ...

Take those pics offline!

[Anonymous Coward]

http://michaelsmith.id.au [michaelsmith.id.au]

Take those pics offline!

Re:Trusting the UN? WHAT THE FUCK?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep. It makes a lot more sense than you think given the power UN has.

The UN was created at a point in time when wars got out of hand.
A forum for nations to talk with each other was needed, but since no-one trusted each other it was necessary that UN was completely toothless otherwise any country that would be likely to be involved in war would leave.
The reason you want to have a country like Saudi on the human rights council is that they then have to dedicate people to think about how to improve human rights given the world view they currently have.
If you exclude them, they can just disregard anything the human rights council says as pointless BS.

We don't need countries like Norway or Finland to raise the bar regarding human rights. We need Saudi and North Korea to catch up.

Oh, and next time you complain about Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to someone who doesn't seem to deserve it, they have pretty much the same idea with that one too.
There is no point in giving it to some Canadian that wouldn't dream of calling anyone an asshole. You give it to someone who might cause a lot of trouble to encourage them to take another path.

Locked room and 1 sandwich

[Big Hairy Ian]

He should be locked in a room with the people who posted his bail (All of whom lost their money) and one sandwich

All My Best Wishes

[SoVi3t]

Good luck, Julian. This should be one of the most important topics on Slashdot right now. Win this for yourself, and the rest of us as well.

Re:All My Best Wishes

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope he rots in prison and you continue to be an angry IT drone.

Breathtaking

[ThatsNotPudding]

I still find it breathtaking we've never heard anything from these two women (at least, I've never seen anything), even so, the anti-JA side claims them to be classic rape victims, while the pro-JA side claims them to be everything from being jealous of the other to being CIA dupes / operatives.

The silence from them (while everyone claims to speak on their behalf) is both deafening and exasperating.

Re:Breathtaking

[Anonymous Coward]

It's almost like being raped might be a traumatic experience that they don't (or can't) talk about easily.

Re:Trusting the UN? WHAT THE FUCK?

[Muad'Dave]

You give it to someone who might cause a lot of trouble to encourage them to take another path.

So what do you do when you give it to someone who wasn't supposed to cause a lot of trouble but did?

Sweden DID send people covertly to Egypt for CIA

[Anonymous Coward]

Talking about ignorant opinions: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/05/cia-rendition-help-european-leaders
This is real, it happened, nobody denies it anymore. And what's worse, they were not sent to US or even Gitmo, they were sent to Egypt where US allies had "more flexible" rules for torturing. So far for the independence and rule of law of democracies in NATO members

Dead Man Walking

[Anonymous Coward]

Assange embarrassed Hillary. She's going to be our next president. Anyone think that she isn't vindictive enough to make sure he has some sort of accident?

Re:Betting on how long it is until he is in the US

[Anonymous Coward]

So back to the question: how long will it take for him to be "extraordinarily rendered" to the US? There should be a betting pool. A good bet would be that he doesn't even sleep in Sweden. That would leave the smallest footprint for a cover up.

By the time the plane from the UK lands, the unmarked CIA jet will already be sitting on the runway with engines warmed up.

That's supposing law would prevail

[Anonymous Coward]

The truth is, Sweden has already been caught in illegal rendition to US puppet regimes so the CIA could have people tortured:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/05/cia-rendition-help-european-leaders

That the charges should have been discarded as "dual ciminality" is no assurance, in a country that has already proven that it is willing to forego the protection of basic human rights and rule of law when it comes to "the terrorists". Bear in mind that many in the US and the media still claim that Assange helped "the terrorists".

I wanna sue Google

[Anonymous Coward]

Google is attempting to disrupt my carreer by hacking into several companies human resource's computers to avoid hiring me, allowing only partners to contact me. Certainly because they are after my ideas for new technologies. I refuse to work with those crooked bastards as long as I live. I have a very high IQ and I mastered computer science, and that's make me a perfect candidate as a rival developing softwares. I already saw what they do: They hire intelligent employees as cheap labor, keeping them apart of area of expertise just to aknowledge information and ideas. And I have really great one.

Re: Good

[Anonymous Coward]

Try to counter any of the points I made

You have made no points, you just paste some words and try to make yourself believe they mean something, when, in fact, they do not.

a puppet to be used

You imply that Snowden is somehow used by Russia, but he is not. He didn't bring his files to Russia, and he has not made any statement that is somehow useful to Russia. If you think otherwise, you're free to provide the examples your original post is sorely missing.

Swartz died a coward's death

I presume this refers to Aaron Swartz, but I fail to see what has he to do with Assange, Snowden, or nerds in general. We, the nerds, are still among the most influential and best paid people in the world and more and more of the world's economy and politics depends on us.

desktop linux numbers dwindling

All desktop computers are dwindling in numbers, but those that sell well and claim high margins are 'nerdy'. And Linux now rules in the device world.

All in all, considering your points, you lose, and we win.

Re: Good

[Anonymous Coward]

Lol. You can keep believing in fairy tales but this won't change the facts.

And the facts are: nerds are not among the influential. Entrepreneurs who like to pose "geek chic" may be, but nerds? Not a chance. Bill Gates may look nerdy, but he has amazing social skills and his interests are quite varied. Definitely not a nerd. As for paid... Programmers and coders are among the worst paid professions and their jobs are easily outsourced. Management is where the money and the careers are, and those are places for the socially capable, not for the sad geek.

Linux rules in the device world? Yes, Android does. Hardly your slackware/debian/ubuntu distro compiled ad nauseam. You should take a hard look at yourself asking why Google made a success overnight by building upon something that a literal army of losers couldn't bring out of the shadows in more than a decade. But you wouldn't like the answer: it takes skill, dedication and an ability to reach out to people. All things neckbeards cannot even conceive.

You have lost. Get over it. The internet has been subverted without you being able to do anything - even if you could have which is dubious. Meanwhile we Real People who care about results and not means will get on with our lives. We have lives, you know. :)

Do not Surrender- Please

[JimSadler]

My feeling is that the Us government will eat you alive if you surrender. Please stay inside the embassy. You are a hero to millions of people.

Re:Do not Surrender- Please

[david_thornley]

If you had a trace of evidence to support that feeling, you'd be more convincing.

My hypothesis: Assange did some illegal sexual stuff with two Swedish women, including rape. He fled to the UK, because he wanted to dodge the charge. In order not to look like someone fleeing justice, he and his supporters started all sorts of rumors. The US has no serious interest in him. Assange appealed the extradition request all the way up, and wanted to avoid going back for a fair trial. When he had exhausted all legal remedies in the UK, he fled to an embassy and spread more rumors.

The other story: The US was and is after Assange, despite not having any legal complaint against him. Assange knew that, and he knew that he'd be snatched if he went to Sweden, so he went to Sweden and planned to settle down there. When it looked like the Swedish authorities might do something, he realized that the UK is well known as a US lapdog, and rolls over on extradition requests, so he went to the UK. When it looked like the UK would send him to Sweden, and agreeing that Sweden would not let him be sent anywhere else without UK approval, he escaped to the Ecuadorian embassy. Now that the US has inexplicably failed to send a Mission: Impossible team to the embassy to retrieve him which the US is well capable of and willing to do, Assange is living in fear of the US.

Re:Trusting the UN? WHAT THE FUCK?

[Anonymous Coward]

So what do you do when you give it to someone who wasn't supposed to cause a lot of trouble but did?

Well, first of all you stop reading right wing propaganda. What you are complaining about is that Obama didn't manage to clean up the complete mess that Bush managed to create and it might not even have been possible to clean that up.

As for when giving it to someone who doesn't try to promote peace afterwards, what you do is shrug and move on.
It's a symbolic prize, it doesn't give anyone actual power. If you give it to Kim Jong-un and it leads to a slight reduction of provocations towards South Korea then it would be worth it.

Re:Betting on how long it is until he is in the US

[Anonymous Coward]

what a strange comment. the gp sounds like an anti-us troll, and i have yet
to hear the first american (outside washington power brokers) speak up for renditions.

Re:Breaking - "UN panel 'rules in Assange's favour

[Dan667]

uh, the US and other countries have been purposely trying to keep the focus on him to keep people from paying attention to their bad behavior Wikileaks has been shedding light on.

Re:Betting on how long it is until he is in the US

[Anonymous Coward]

Wake up people.

Sweden is just a front for law enforcement in the USA.

Thanks Alex Jones

One Final Option

[Dr. Evil]

A giant all-night Assange look-alike rave at the embassy.

Thousands of Assanges.

Re:One Final Option

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm Julian.

Re:One Final Option

[Foobar of Borg]

I'm Julian.

No, I'm Julian! And so is my wife!

Let him go

[p51d007]

Within a week....someone will "take him out" in hopes of shutting him up or something.

Re:Sweden DID send people covertly to Egypt for CI

[Viol8]

Ah yes, The Guardian, that not at all anti US socialist propaganda sheet.

Re:Betting on how long it is until he is in the US

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone who starts a comment with "wake up people" I automatically ignore.

Re:Betting on how long it is until he is in the US

[ooloorie]

Wake up people. Sweden is just a front for law enforcement in the USA.

No, it's not a "front"; it's a country that has an extradition treaty with the US.

The entire goal of this disgusting show is to get him on US soil

If the US has a legal and valid arrest warrant for him, then any country that the US has an extradition treaty with needs to extradite him; it's as simple as that. Where do you see the problem?

where he will be "disappeared".

Assange is far too prominent to "disappear", nor would there be any point to it. If the Obama administration wants to get their hands on him, it's for the trial and the publicity.

Re:Betting on how long it is until he is in the US

[shawn2772]

Anyone who starts a comment with "wake up people" I automatically ignore.

A good strategy. That phrase generally prefaces a big pile of unsupported claims that the author believes are so obvious that he's surprised everyone else can't see it. If it actually were obvious, the author wouldn't have to explain it, and if it's not, then the right approach is to offer evidence rather than to imply that other people are stupid for not seeing it. But, given that the author chose the latter course, you know there isn't going to be anything of substance.

Re:He's lost his freedom forever

[denis-The-menace]

Nope he'll just go MIA.

And we'll never know until he surfaces again.

Re:Betting on how long it is until he is in the US

[mark-t]

I would not be remotely surprised if that is what actually happens, however...

the goal is to make an example

That goal is inconsistent with keeping it secret and denying that they had him.

"I expect" != "will happen"

[davidwr]

I expect the immediate return of my passport and the termination of further attempts to arrest me.

*pats Julian on the head like a mother consoling her preschool child* Dear, dear, dear Julian, you can expect that all you want, but that won't make it come true. *hugs*

well

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope he gets well, he's fighting the good fight.

Will power

[Anonymous Coward]

Where there is a will, there is a way. If he wants to get out of the embassy without being detected, I know of a way. But I'm not going to publish it until next week.

Profit

[phorm]

The best profit in news can be from having an article that is first, and accurate. It doesn't matter much if somebody else had access to their source if they broke the story first and it was well-detailed.

Watching ...

[PPH]

... the online flight resources for a group of Gulfstreams and other assorted aircraft.

Say what you will

[Anonymous Coward]

But those deceptive, brown-nosing Brits will still try to sell him out to the Americans.

Re:Say what you will

[PPH]

Brits will still try to sell him out

They had better. Or we won't let them buy F-35s for $140 million each.

Don't Forget

[transami]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0

Re:Don't Forget

[transami]

Link

Re:Sweden DID send people covertly to Egypt for CI

[Anonymous Coward]

More like the left-wing of Britain's secret intelligence agencies...

Making a run for it

[Max_W]

I wonder why he is considering a surrender without even trying to make a run for it.

I am sure the embassy is well guarded, but so had been the Alcatraz.

Re:Betting on how long it is until he is in the US

[Anonymous Coward]

You need to learn the difference between then and than. Mixing them up is like putting speed bumps in your writing. People who read a lot get tripped up and have to go back and reread to try to decipher your writing.

Computer skills...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the second time in my professional life that technology gives a fundamental step towards a new level. The next one could be about flying cars... (fingers crossed).

Ah! Don't forget to check the ass off the blood that You get! Since the Jojo was missing to now, could somebody pay to make a DNA transplant to another "person", and flee away from it's miserable doom? Hmm...

Re:Trusting the UN? WHAT THE FUCK?

[jcr]

I've got news for you, sparky: saying "right wing propaganda" isn't some kind of magic incantation that makes your favorite teleprompter-in-chief's incompetence just vanish in a puff of wishful thinking.

What you are complaining about is that Obama didn't manage to clean up the complete mess that Bush managed to create

More like, the motherfucker continued everything he ran against. How many times has he signed extensions to the PATRIOT act?

-jcr

Re:Trusting the UN? WHAT THE FUCK?

[Rakarra]

Well, first of all you stop reading right wing propaganda. What you are complaining about is that Obama didn't manage to clean up the complete mess that Bush managed to create and it might not even have been possible to clean that up.

Come on, it's not "right-wing propaganda" to think that Obama's Nobel was total bullshit. It came down to exactly two things "Thank god that Bush isn't in the White House," and "Obama promises to lead the US to peace." Maybe if Obama had delivered on that he might, might have been eligible, but the fact that they gave him the Peace Prize for making campaign promises that most Democratic candidates made shows it to be a political-motivated prize. It greatly degraded the legitimacy of the prize itself and gives it all the authority of Time Magazine's Person of the Year.

Re: Good

[Rakarra]

Try to counter any of the points I made. You can not.

You start with a number of false assumptions, and then knock them down, but they're still strawmen.
*) You assume most nerds other than a couple on Slashdot gave a shit about Aaron Schwartz. I thought he was getting a bad shake from an over-zealous prosecutor, but he took the idiot's and coward's way out. Sucks to be him.

*) Snowden is a defeat of "geekdom?" Snowden isn't really emblematic of geekdom one way or another, most of the public see it either as a government whistleblower exposing illegal operations, or a whistleblower/felon who ran to Russia. Any nerdiness or lack thereof rarely comes into the conversation; I doubt most people could say what his role in the government was. Most nerds aren't in government so they don't feel like what happened to Snowden REALLY pertains to them, because they're never going to be in the position he was in.

*) Your milage may vary based on the Star Trek reboot, but a ton of nerds like it, and a ton of non-nerds don't like it. There's a decent split on both sides. Just about everyone, nerds and non-nerds alike like the Star Wars remake, and everyone thought the same about the BSG remake. Most nerds, even comic book nerds think the Marvel movies are great, and they're making bank too. Most other remakes, at least remakes of things that were popular, end up being critical and commercial failures regardless of whether the critic is a nerd or not.

*) The "Gamergate" fiasco pretty much failed for everyone. Everyone knows that there are a bunch of 15-year-olds on XBox Live who say all sorts of shit, but everyone knew that already. The attempt to paint everyone who games with that broad brush failed; there are way too many who game now, not just the living-in-his-mother's-basement type, and the only ones who parrot that line are "games journalism" sites that no one actually reads and feminist blogs who have a marginally-equivalent amount of real world power.

I know you're trolling, and I'm feeding the trolls, but sometimes troll-feeding is fun.

Re:Breaking - "UN panel 'rules in Assange's favour

[david_thornley]

Exactly what has the US been doing about him? The only person interested in keeping the news focused on Assange is Assange.

Nice roleplaying, fagboat

[Anonymous Coward]

I put on my robe and wizard hat

Is Assange really that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

Publicly announcing when he's going to be leaving the embassy... hmm... a rouse by any other name would smell so sweet.

I envisage lots of black vans parked outside the embassy on Friday, probably a couple o' and choppers dog squads just in case.

I mean really does Assange expect NOT to be renditioned back to the US? I don't think he's that stupid.

My guess is he'll either a) have let the embassy prior to Friday, b) have a flash mob of Assange look-a-likes decend on the embassy at the appropriate time or c) change his mind about leaving and order a pizza

What, pray tell, is "lameness" (to filter)?

[shanen]

Okay, then in that case, it would seem isolating the paragraph should have increased the relative lameness of the comment, but that is not what happened. In isolation, the paragraph did not trigger any complaint.

I think the creators of slashdot were sincere, though I don't yet have any impressions about the intentions or sincerity of the newest owners. However, I also think that slashdot should stop abusing the English language. It has enough problems.

Question: Why stuck at embassy?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can the Ecuadorians not smuggle him out in a diplomatic package and fly him to their own country? At least then, he'd have an entire country to roam around in.

Now, granted, the US could just do a snatch job on him, so I understand why A) he wouldn't necessarily trust this plan and B) prefers to stay inside the relative small confines and safety of an embassy on foreign soil.