Slashdot Mirror
Ecuador Will Be Handing Assange Over To UK Authorities 'In Coming Weeks Or Days': RT (express.co.uk)
Ecuador is planning to hand over WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to UK authorities in the "coming weeks or even days," RT editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan said, citing her own sources. Simonyan reported the news in a recent tweet, which was reposted by WikiLeaks. Slashdot reader Okian Warrior first shared the news. Daily Express reports: Foreign Office minister Sir Alan Duncan is said to be involved in the diplomatic effort, which has come weeks ahead of a visit by new Ecuadorian president, Lenin Moreno, who called Mr Assange an "inherited problem." He also referred to the exiled WikiLeaks founder as a "stone in the shoe." Sources close to Assange claim he was not aware of the talks, but believe America is piling "significant pressure" on Ecuador to give him up, according to the Sunday Times. The sources claim that America has threatened to block a loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) if he is not removed from the embassy, based in Knightsbridge, west London. UPDATE 7/21/18: The Intercept also confirmed the news. Glen Greenwald, former reporter for The Guardian, writes: "A source close to the Ecuadorian Foreign Ministry and the President's office, unauthorized to speak publicly, has confirmed to the Intercept that Moreno is close to finalizing, if he has not already finalized, an agreement to hand over Assange to the UK within the next several weeks. The withdrawal of asylum and physical ejection of Assange could come as early as this week."
He was certainly OK in the early days, but when he became a Russian puppet and started one sided "leaks" in order to sway the elections to the candidate most likely to abuse human rights, he stopped being defensible.
He's also apparently a likely rapist. Which is why he's hiding out in the first place. The "It's all America!" stuff is codswallop. The US has no extradition warrant out on him, and never has done. He just doesn't want to go to Sweden and be asked awkward questions.
How I'm feeling in response to this news...
"Lock and load, Brides of Christ!"
Equador is a secret mystical place where the rare covfefe plant is grown, which when smoked makes everything make sense.
It's spelled editqors.
The actual situation
If he's handed over to the British, he'll go to jail for his violation of the terms of his bail; there's already a warrant out for him for this. During this time, Sweden can decide to reopen the case, now that he's available, if they choose. The three misdemeanors (2x molestation, 1x unlawful sexual coersion) have hit the statute of limitations, but the rape filing has a couple years left before its statute of limitations expires.
"Lock and load, Brides of Christ!"
.
There sure is a lot of bitterness out there from the people whose misdeeds he's revealed, and it seems they really, really want to "get even" though it will make them look even worse to those of us who are paying attention to anything like truth. And as if it'd make us forget their original misdeeds.
.
Anti-virtue signalling by those who want to deter any future entities who would reveal their wrongdoing?
Why guess when you can know? Measure!
Does Sweden not toll the statute of limitations when the suspect is a fugitive from justice? This is the classic kind of case where someone (under US law, at least) loses the right to challenge a delay in being tried for an offense: the delay is due solely to their status as a fugitive.
Before the Clinton emails, remember that Assange did the world a big service by leaking civilian death logs in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as videos of war crimes by US troops. The world needed to know how disproportionate the US response after 9/11 was -- the US needs to know that the world is watching whenever it starts another military homicide spree.
Sad day if he's being railroaded at the US's request, though the source (RT) is somewhat suspect.
For the record, the unexpired charge is:
The statute of limitations would have been hit in August 2020. #1-3 are already expired.
"Lock and load, Brides of Christ!"
I don't know about Sweden, but in the US you can't run the statute of limitations by being a fugitive from justice.
At least here in the US, once charges are filed, there is no further statute of limitations. The accused can get the charges dismissed if the trial is unreasonably delayed[1] through no fault of their own, but in this case it seems plausible that the lack of speedy trial has to do with the defendant.
[1] See Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972) for a more full discussion
Yes, he has a warrant out for him for bail jumping in the UK.
"Lock and load, Brides of Christ!"
Assange's contribution to humanity is immense. Uncovering really dodgee dealings which are ruining countless lives.
I was a strong proponent of Wikileaks, hell I even bought one of their T-shirts to support them. Right up to the point when they were always singularly highlighting grievances in the US and the West in general, while seemingly giving real police states like Russia and China with desolate human rights conditions a free pass.
Also Assange has been a too useful idiot to Putin's plan of dismantling Europe and hurting NATO lately in his support of separatist movements like Brexit and Catalonian independence. Parts of Europe are practically paralyzed due to being busy with these non-issues. It's no secret that Russia is supporting separatist and right-wing parties throughout Europe.
Assange has been acting like one of these Russian agents lately, whose purpose it is to undermine our democracies by spreading FUD, so fuck him.
Also, Slashdot shouldn't post articles citing RT.com sources. RT is Russia's propaganda mouthpiece disguised as a a legit news channel.
You're assuming that the "justice" is actually justice, not a kangaroo court. I view him dodging "justice" as somewhat in between people fleeing East Berlin and people violating the old US fugitive slave law. "The law's the law" is a platitude for people who choose not to think. No. Governments aren't always right, and sometimes people fleeing so-called justice is a good thing.
In this case, it's word-told-in-person-and-SMSed against admitted-word.
Specifically: the incident in question occurred late morning after a night of refusing to consent to unprotected sex, from a person who had a well documented lifetime paranoia about unprotected sex. Earlier in the morning, she had complained - both on SMS with a friend, and in person to another friend encountered at the grocery store while out buying food for Assange - about his behavior, and how mad she was getting about him continually trying to F* her unprotected. She then returned home and went to sleep. Assange does not deny the prevous night's refusals to consent to unprotected sex; he just claims that she woke up and consented.
In short, Assange's argument is: This person, with a well documented history of paranoia about unprotected sex, who was literally complaining about his attempts to sleep with her unprotected right up to when she went to sleep, just suddenly woke up and had a change in lifetime philosophy with a person she had just been mad at.
"Lock and load, Brides of Christ!"
RT is known as a propaganda outlet and is state-owned by Russia. This doesn't even rate to the level of published by RT, but is a tweet from the RT editor-in-chief saying anonymous sources told her.
Not sure this should rate comment at this point.
I don't subscribe to the "ends justify the means" theory here. Yeah, he's shown light on some scummy shit that needed being exposed. But you don't get to dodge justice and jump bail.
Nobody is above the law. Whistleblowers don't get a pass on non-whistleblowing-related shit.
Let's see how long it takes for him to be shipped from Sweden (where he might be guilty of something) to the USA, where he isn't guilty of anything except pissing off people with too much power.
Remember: Sweden had already closed the case against him and returned his passport after he voluntarily went to be interviewed. He's agreed many times to be interviewed by Sweden on neutral ground.
It was US pressure that reopened the 'case' against him and started all this crap. It's the USA that's really after him, not Sweden. Sweden is just an excuse.
No sig today...
It's right next to Molvania and Latveria.
Also borders Nambia, Columbia and Denmakr
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
Putin's plan of dismantling Europe and hurting NATO lately in his support of separatist movements like Brexit and Catalonian independence. Parts of Europe are practically paralyzed due to being busy with these non-issues. It's no secret that Russia is supporting separatist and right-wing parties throughout Europe.
So...it was the Russians who sent all those radical Third World migrants to Europe?
Don't get me started on that...
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
This happening a few days after Trump visit to the UK, while May needs to find new friends for the post-brexit.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Sweden couldn't legally do that: if they extradite him from the UK via a European Arrest Warrant, they can't then extradite him to anywhere without applying to the High Court in London. If they decide to ignore that provision of the treaty which established the EAW, they would have to assume that no-one would ever honour their applications again. Assange might well be narcissistic enough to think that he's worth it, but I'm amazed that anyone else would.
He's agreed many times to be interviewed by Sweden on neutral ground.
Assange could not "agree" to that for the simple reason Swedish prosecutors have never proposed such silly idea.
In reality Assange as a fugitive of justice made unreasonable proposals to the Swedish prosecutors, proposals inadmissible under the Swedish law (which means the prosecutors couldn't agree to them even if they wanted to).
Please stop spewing absurd propaganda. You have the right to defend Assange as much as you like, but not by disseminating fake information.
Catalin Braescu
Ofaly.com
So were you this upset when Trump pardoned Joe Arpaio? Who was convicted of contempt of court for openly refusing a court order telling him to stop civil rights violations? And now you're telling me you wouldn't expect a Trump pardon here? And that you support Trump and the rule of law? And that Trump isn't protecting obviously criminal people? ffs dude, that's some reality you must be living in. I'm with you with all those names, but you've got a giant gaping blind spot if you think Trump shouldn't be on that list and are out of your damn mind if you think Trump would put the rule of law above protecting himself (A President can pardon himself, right guys??).
That's my fault, I think.
The eds corrected it in the summary, but used my submitted title verbatim.
Sorry about that. I sometimes get word confusion from studying various languages. And yes, I did study *that* language for awhile.
(For comparison, is it Brazil or Brasil?)
I thought Columbia was where they discovered electricity.
When you sympathize with stupidity, you start thinking like an idiot.
Those close to Assange say "they are piling on the pressure," so, for now, it's a fact not in evidence.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
So...it was the Russians who sent all those radical Third World migrants to Europe?
Yes. Through their support of Assad the butcher, and other destabilizing conflicts in developing nations. It's economic warfare by refugee.
...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
Do you expect Trump to pardon him if he's in fact done something illegal?
Yes, it would be repeating the pattern he's already established.
I want the rule of the law to fucking mean something again
Then you are in a quandary, because you're supporting the wrong person. Trump is, at best, an immature bullying narcissist with no respect for democracy or the rule of law.
I'm not sure why you want to jail President Bush though (which one, BTW?)
OK, he's offered to be interviewed many times. How's that?
He's also offered to go to Sweden if they'll garantee he won't be extradited to the USA, they could have done that, there's no current extradition order on record.
But ... we know this is a case of high-level corruption (the Interpol arrest warrant proves that beyond any doubt) so they've denied him every chance.
No sig today...
You know who also got innocent people killed with their bombs? The US government and military.
I'm agreeing with you, but have more to add:
There were two women.
One said he raped her but she later revealed that she did, indeed, express a liking for rough sex.
The other woman only wanted to talk to Assange to inquire as to whether he had any sexually transmissible diseases, because a rubber broke.
That woman self-tested and was found to be OK.
Both women dropped the charges.
Sweden, on its own volition, issued an arrest warrant for Assange on the premise that they wanted to question him.
He said, "Fine. Let's meet and talk."
Sweden ordered him to come back there.
Fearing a trap, Julian declined.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
As far as Swedish media have reported (I live in Sweden), you are absolutely correct. But there are a few further facts that seem a bit odd:
- when he first left Sweden his attorney had previously asked the prosecutor if JA could leave the country. The prosecutor answered "yes."
- while in London JA has offered to be interrogated/questioned by Swedish police over internet or in person if Sweden would send a policeman to the UK. Sweden has rejected both offers on for me unclear grounds, most of which seem to be based on the fact that a Swedish policeman visiting the UK would not be able to apply the pressure of law on JA like he could in Sweden. However, this completely disregards the fact that UK police could apply the same pressure....
Even before the facts above took place, there were oddities in the case:
- according to media the first time the supposedly raped women contacted police, it was to find out whether or not they could force JA to take an STD-test
- somehow this inquiry was turned into a rape case by the policewoman they talked to
- the two supposed rape victim were interrogated over the phone and the conversation was not recorded, despite police regulations that rape victims _must_ be interrogated in the police station and the interrogation _must_ be recorded.
- both women were assigned the same attorney for defence. This verges on being illegal, as each victim of a crime should have a representative who cares only about them and no one else in the case: this way any possible confusion of who said what or what was done to whom (or similar confusion) is avoided.
- the first prosecutor who was assigned the case quite quickly came to the conclusion that there is not enough evidence to do anything, and dropped the case
- the next prosecutor who took the case (apparently voluntarily) just happens to be a well-known feminist and member of the party who had the power of government at the time. One of the supposed rape victims is also a feminist and member of the same party. This prosecutor has at least once said something along the lines that it must be possible to punish men even if a court finds them innocent.
- this second prosecutor called a press conference and announced to the world that JA was wanted for interrogation in connection with a possible rape. JA found out he was wanted by reading the news....
Democrats not only aren't left, they hate it more than Republicans do. Case in point: how they still whine about Nader in the 2000 election but NEVER talk about the hundreds of thousands of Florida Democrats who voted for Bush.
IF there is pressure in the process. It pisses me off that I have to post this for you right from the goddam summary:
Sources close to Assange claim he was not aware of the talks, but believe America is piling "significant pressure" on Ecuador to give him up ...
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Interpol getting involved in a single-person sex offense? LOL!
Yeah, lol! They've been hunting Roman Polanski since 2005! Hilarious!
Extradition is permitted, provided that the act for which extradition is requested is equivalent to a crime that is punishable under Swedish law by imprisonment for at least one year. If sentence has been passed in the state applying for extradition, the penalty must be imprisonment for at least four months or other institutional detention for an equivalent period. Thus, extradition requires an offence punishable under the law of both countries ("dual criminality") that, in principle, is of a certain degree of seriousness.
Extradition may not be granted for military or political offences. Nor may extradition be granted if there is reason to fear that the person whose extradition is requested runs a risk - on account of his or her ethnic origins, membership of a particular social group or religious or political beliefs - of being subjected to persecution threatening his or her life or freedom, or is serious in some other respect. Nor, moreover, may extradition be granted if it would be contrary to fundamental humanitarian principles, e.g. in consideration of a person's youth or the state of this person's health. Finally, in principle, extradition may not be granted if a judgment has been pronounced for the same offence in this country. Nor may extradition be granted if the offence would have been statute-barred by limitation under Swedish law.
The state requesting for extradition must show that there is reason for extradition in the specific case. The outcome of the crime investigation in the requesting state - generally a conviction or a detention order - must be enclosed with the request for extradition. When extradition is granted, certain conditions may be laid down. For example, without the consent of the Government in the particular case, the person who is extradited may not be prosecuted or punished in the other state for any other offence committed prior to extradition (the "principle of speciality"). Nor may he or she be re-extradited to another state without the consent of the Government. Furthermore, nor may the person who is extradited be sentenced to death.
I'm not sure how Swedish law is on foreign nationals leaking government secrets, but one could argue that that resides under "military or political offences". I'm actually a bit surprised that there does not appear to be a provision requiring an expectation of a fair trial, though that could be what "being subjected to persecution threatening his or her life or freedom, or is serious in some other respect" refers to. Also note that:
If the person whose extradition is requested opposes extradition, it falls to the Supreme Court to examine whether extradition can be legally granted under the conditions laid down by law.
The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
Remember: Sweden had already closed the case against him
There's still outstanding charges he's wanted for.
He's agreed many times to be interviewed by Sweden on neutral ground.
Yeah I know. All our legal systems let fugitives decide the terms of their interview.
Every living person that Trump has pardoned has done something illegal. That's why they call it a "pardon". Not because he was really innocent, but because he had been found guilty. By a judge and/or jury. And sentenced. To jail.
You are welcome on my lawn.
And, no, they were not walking with armed insurgents. They had assault rifles
You heard it here folks: people with assault rifles are not armed!
Serious question here but is everyone a Russian puppet to you people? No doubt that is he is rapist and that is why Sweden wanted him. But a Russian agent to boot now?
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Sweden you are considered innocent until proven guilty
Oh please. In no country are you considered innocent until proven guilty. That looks great posted to the side of a billboard but other than that is bullshit. In court and to the police you are guilty until proven beyond all doubt that you are innocent, even then you are still guilty.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Hi. You should not listen to a thing RT has to say, and I wish Slashdot wouldn't okay articles sourced to them. They are a propaganda/disinformation outlet. I expect to be modded down by Russians now, so mods, I hope you're scanning at -1.
What you are explaining are the normal rules of extradition. But there is more. Let's say a German commits a crime in the USA, then travels back to Germany. And he gets extradited. Then either when his court case ends with "not guilty", or when his jail sentence ends, the Americans have to send him back to Germany. They have no right to send him anywhere else. They are also not allowed to prosecute him for anything than what was claimed in the extradition request.
Now Sweden has requested extradition from the UK. If or when the UK extradites him, Sweden can only prosecute him for the crimes in the extradition request, and they have no right to extradite him anywhere else. Even if the USA had a 100% legally perfect and justified extradition request, Sweden could not extradite him. Had he stayed in Sweden, they could extradite him, but not if he is only in Sweden because he was extradited.
Yes, stories published by US news corporations and the US government aren't propaganda at all and are completely accurate, valid, and reliable.
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
I think you'll have a hard time convincing the IMF to make payments in Bitcoin. Christine Lagarde is essentially the USA's stooge within that organisation. She spent much of her formative life studying and working in the US and is very much of the Washington political ilk. BTW, she failed her entrance exam to study as a senior civil servant in France, which may explain a lot. It would seem it's easier to get away with bullshitting your way into power in Washington than in Paris.
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
The Russians have a term for this: Kompromat.
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
... because it's trendy.
That's exactly what the Russian media is trying to get people to believe. That Russia-bashing is some kind of trend plotted by the west to discredit Russia.
If it weren't for the fact that Putin's Russia is the sociopath on the international scale at the moment.
- Annexation of Krimea
- Invasion of eastern Ukraine by Russian soldiers "on vacation"
- The downing of a passenger airliner with a Russian AA missile provided to the separatists
- Support for dictator Assad in Syria
- Covering up for use of chemical weapons in Syria
- Support for right-wing parties across Europe
- Internet trolls spreading FUD across the western Interenet
- Meddling in democratic process of US and other Western governments
- The ongoing murders of opposition figures and journalists in Russia
The list goes on.
Of course, a website like RT.com that is funded by the Kremlin would like to have you believe that that is all anti-Russian propaganda. Big surprise.
I'm going to have to stop you right there; the current preferred term is "Feminazgûl". Our slogan: "The World Of Men Will Fall".
We're also made of straw.
"Lock and load, Brides of Christ!"
They never wanted to press charges in the first place, however for serious offences like rape the state can and will press charges even if the victims refuse to do so.
Here is a list of the journalists killed in Russia under Putin. I stopped counting at 100, and I had barely gotten to the Mevedev years. There were still a lot more to go. This isn't all of Putin's enemies who have been killed, just the journalists.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You are welcome on my lawn.
That includes National Pentagon Radio, which (gasp) is funded by the government. Or just ask Zombie Ed Shultz, as it wasn't the head of RT that called him up minutes before he was going to cover Bernie Sander's announcement that he was going to run for president in 2016 and ordered him to cover some shit irrelevant story from Tennessee instead.
Refusing to Take Sides, NPR Takes Sides With Torture Deniers
Yeah, it would. See the recent denial of extradition for an alleged hacker based on how the U.S. tortures and abuses prisoners. Which is no exaggeration after Obama had Chelsea Manning tortured for 18 months with solitary confinement and then sentenced in a kangaroo court.
Sweden has handed people over to the CIA who were promptly tortured. Sweden has also gone to great lengths to extradite people from non-extradition counties, interrogated them for weeks in solitary confinement without a lawyer, and then deported them to other countries to face unrelated charges.
I think most people know not to believe everything they see on RT.
Unfortunately there are still a few people who do believe everything they see on BBC/CNN.
The CIA was agitating for "regime change" in Syria long before the Arab Spring protests came along. CIA operations that armed and funded your "moderate" ISIS and Al Queda jihadists in invading that country to cause it's "civil war".
The case of Gottfrid Svartholm neatly answers the concerns of those who dismiss Assange's (perfectly justified) fears of being interrogated without a lawyer and being handed over to the U.S.
https://www.theguardian.com/co...
When your "legal system" has a penchant for kidnapping, murder and torture? That's exactly what you get to do. This line of CIA apologia is also rendered mute by the fact that Sweden has interviewed dozens of suspects abroad since 2010. Moreso by the additional fact that Assange has offered to return to Sweden if Sweden promises not to hand him over to US custody. Even if you are an Assange hater and think that offer is a bluff, if Sweden were to take it up, Ecuador would no longer have a reason to offer Assange asylum.
Sweden could easily make this be about rape charges if its only about rape charges, and could have done so years ago. They've chosen not to. Which means this isn't about an alleged rape and never has been.
There were two women.
One said he raped her but she later revealed that she did, indeed, express a liking for rough sex.
The other woman only wanted to talk to Assange to inquire as to whether he had any sexually transmissible diseases, because a rubber broke.
That woman self-tested and was found to be OK.
Both women dropped the charges.
Sweden, on its own volition, issued an arrest warrant for Assange on the premise that they wanted to question him.
He said, "Fine. Let's meet and talk."
Sweden ordered him to come back there.
Fearing a trap, Julian declined.
Not quite.
The first woman was the one who experienced "rough sex" and the broken condom, which she thought Assange deliberately broke (he claimed he wasn't aware... which seems implausible).
The second women had repeatedly expressed her preference against unprotected sex and so they'd have protected sex. But later she fell asleep and awoke to find him having unprotected sex with her.
The first one seems like some sketchy behaviour on his part but I don't think there's a case on its own.
But the second one is definite rape, not only was she asleep (and unable to consent) when it started, but it was a form of sex she had expressly prohibited.
I stole this Sig
When you publish mugshots and names, making it difficult to get a job if you're arrested, let alone convicted, repeat crime will happen. Repeat offenses mean the US is doing a poor job at rehabilitation.
You're only insulting your own intelligence here. Remind us (and by us I mean you) who's the current head of the CIA? How many high level politicians have openly called for Assange's assassination? The number of whisteblowers persecuted in the previous administration's war on sources - three times as many as all previous presidents combined? The same president who had a foreign head of state's plane forced down because Edward Snowden might be aboard? All much more recently than 17 years ago. Hate Assange all you want, it's a free country, but to deny that his fear of Swedish complicity in US persecution is completely justified takes a powerful level of dumbfuckery.
TSTRT
There's always the standard issue "we wont extradite to countries that torture or execute prisoners", which easily applies to the U.S. Torture recently applied to Chelsea Manning for being a Wikileaks source.