Slashdot Mirror
Wikileaks Co-founder Julian Assange Arrested in London (theguardian.com)
Wikileaks co-founder Julian Assange has been arrested at the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder was granted refuge in 2012 while on bail in the UK over sexual assault allegations against him in Sweden. From a report: At the time, Assange claimed that if he was extradited to Sweden he might be arrested by the US and face charges relating to WikiLeaks's publication of hundreds of thousands of US diplomatic cables. The journalist and Assange supporter John Pilger called last week for people to "fill the street outside the embassy and protect him and show solidarity with a courageous man." US authorities have never officially confirmed that they have charged Assange, but in November 2018 a mistake in a document filed in an unrelated case hinted that criminal charges might have been prepared in secret. London's Metropolitan police released a statement which said officers had executed a warrant after the Ecuadorian government withdrew asylum.
The worst thing that could happen to him now is that the US doesn't try to extradite him and England only questions him and lets him go. He'll have thrown away 7 years of his life voluntarily and look like a narcissistic idiot (more so than he already does).
In depth analysis of the political situation surrounding his arrest, endless exploration of whether he'll be extradited to the US, complex discussions on why the police were permitted to enter the embassy to arrest him.
Not a single fucking mention of his cat.
What's happening to the cat! Come on BBC, step up, help us with the important question here.
Freedom is dangerous. Big Brother will save us from Freedom. Because Big Brother loves us all.
Nobody with half a brain accused him of Treason. He's not a US citizen, he can't commit treason against the US, he has no expectation of loyalty to it. Not even for releasing the footage of the lawful Apache combat actions. (The actions in the footage are not crimes under the Laws of Land Warfare as outlined in the various conventions.)
As to Assange, he cannot be held criminally liable for any of the classified data leaked to Wikileaks and published by him on the site. He never agreed to protect the information from release. The traitors that released it, Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden are the ones facing criminal charges, as they both signed lawful contracts to protect the secrets of this nation.
The way it works is: If I have a security clearance (I did until it expired after I retired from the Army) and I give you classified information I should be protecting, I am then criminally liable for my actions or inactions that allow the security compromise and the release of the classified information. You however are not. As a US citizen there is a tenuous responsibility that you might hold for receiving but it's not commonly prosecuted unless you also have a clearance. But if you are a citizen of a foreign nation, like Assange, even if that nation is closely allied with the US. You are under no obligation at all to protect that information.
Now, if you directed me to collect and give you information, then you fall into the realm of conducting international espionage actions. If caught in the US you can be arrested and confined until such time as we trade you back to your home country. But more likely we would just declare you persona non-grata and kick you out of the country. If discovered conducting such activities in another country, we could ask them to do the same things and if allied they might, but they would not extradite you to the US. You would be subject to their laws regarding captured spies.
The US has never asked anyone to arrest him with the intention of extraditing him. We have nothing we can extradite him for. I won't deny that we might have quietly encouraged the Swedish government to press the issue and the British to make the arrest for extradition to Sweden with the intent of at least making it harder for him to run Wikileaks and leak secrets our own traitors have given him. But Extradition to the US is out of the question. There is literally nothing we can extradite him for. He did not violate any US law that he is subject to.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
It's obvious that journalism needs new economic models, but WikiLeaks is NOT one of them. Having read several books about WikiLeaks, I think the underlying problem was the lack of a viable economic model. There was a good idea under there, but it was buried so deeply and Assange got so far away from any form of actual journalism that the cart got in front of the horse.
At first WikiLeaks actually understood that the documents should be vetted to make sure they weren't being used to propagate propaganda. Also real journalism requires considering the possible negative ramifications of the release of the information, as when an innocent person might get murdered because their identity is revealed to a vengeful criminal. Multiple sources are important, too, and it is very rare that information cannot be verified by some method or other.
However Assange rather quickly decided it was more important to prioritize the releases of information for maximization of the value to WikiLeaks, including how the information would affect the increasingly important financial donations WikiLeaks needed. Fairly early in the process, they were overwhelmed with more information than they knew what to do with, so they were forced to start picking and choosing what to reveal, and when, and that is when Assange started tasting the poisonous fruit. Follow the money.
Solution time? My own proposed solution approach for the economic troubles of journalism would be a solution-based approach. The readers would be able to contribute to solution projects with the journalists earning a percentage for revealing and publicizing the problems. I think there would also need to be an independent entity (I call it the charity share brokerage) that would provide project guidance and evaluation, as well as handling the money.
Disappointed but not surprised that I couldn't find any substantive comments here on Slashdot, and especially not among the trolls' mods. Enough time for now, so I bid you ADSAuPR, atAJG.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
The "ruling" on arbitrary detention can legitimately be laughed at because its ridiculous.
The problem with that ruling is that it didn't just declare Assanges time in the Ecuadorean embassy as "arbitrary detention" - that might have had credit.
No. The ruling in fact declared that Assange was "arbitrarily detained" from the moment he was arrested by British police to face the extradition warrant, several years prior to his abscondment to the embassy.
Yes, that's correct - the UN working group considers the judicial process of responding to a legal and valid extradition request to be "arbitrary detention". They apparently seemingly find the British legal system, which allowed Assange representation of his choosing, and repeated appeals to the highest courts in the land, to consist of "arbitrary detention".
Which is why the UN ruling can be dismissed out of hand. It's an absurd ruling, to say the least.
You don't expose Hillary and just walk away.
Not that he walked away. Spending 6 years cooped up in a single building in down town London is not exactly living the good life and has got to be a mental strain. Based on the video I saw, the guy has not aged well and appears to be a mental case now. Of course that's what his hosts are saying about him, that they didn't think it was healthy for him to continue to be under house arrest like he was.
I suspect that he's not really in all that much danger. He may be in jail for the majority of what remains of his life, but the last 6 years where not kind to him to start with. He may be much better off, though less visible in the years to come. If indeed he has mental issues now, he can get treatment. I wish him the best, but we all knew he was either going to die in the embassy under effective house arrest or face the music someday.
And about exposing Hillary... She exposed herself, (that's a mental picture I wish I hadn't seen) Julian just pointed it out like the little boy who said the "Look! The emperor has no clothes". Trump benefited as a result. So in a way, you can blame Julian for at least part of Hillary's loss.... (As if she needs any more items on her "it's not my fault" list.)
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Funnily enough, the US has placed an extradition request, as confirmed now by the UK metropolitan police. So I'm afraid you are wrong.
From The Guardian:
Extradition request from US confirmed
Scotland Yard has confirmed that Assange was arrested on behalf of the US after receiving a request for his extradition.
In a statement it said:
Julian Assange, 47, (03.07.71) has today, Thursday 11 April, been further arrested on behalf of the United States authorities, at 10:53hrs after his arrival at a central London police station. This is an extradition warrant under Section 73 of the Extradition Act. He will appear in custody at Westminster Magistrates’ Court as soon as possible.
"Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
It wasn't me! Some impostor using my slashdot handle!
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
Apparently, the US does think they have something they can extradite him for, because he's now been arrested under the extradition act on behalf of US authorities. The Swedes seem to be planning on re-opening their assualt charges as well, so there's a potential he'll be making a detour to Scandinavia before crossing the Atlantic, which might not be all that unlikely if the objective is about keeping him bottled up as long as possible. Given he's now a proven flight risk I suspect his chances of bail while all this drags on through the appeals courts (which has taken years in other high profile cases) are pretty slim, so even if he ultimately prevails and avoids extradition it's likely to be quite some time before he's getting out of custody.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
He was holed up in that embassy a good 4 years before the Hillary stuff.
As to Assange, he cannot be held criminally liable for any of the classified data leaked to Wikileaks and published by him on the site. He never agreed to protect the information from release. The traitors that released it, Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden are the ones facing criminal charges, as they both signed lawful contracts to protect the secrets of this nation.
It's cute that people still think the US intelligence apparatus follow any sort of rules or laws.
"Julian Assange, 47, (03.07.71) has today, Thursday 11 April, been further arrested on behalf of the United States authorities, at 10:53hrs after his arrival at a central London police station. This is an extradition warrant under Section 73 of the Extradition Act. He will appear in custody at Westminster Magistrates' Court later today (Thursday, 11 April)."
The US has never asked anyone to arrest him with the intention of extraditing him.
Sadly the facts have now overtaken your careful and well-reasoned argument. The US has requested his extradition on computer hacking charges for helping Manning.
He's not wrong, in that they're not charging Assange with treason or with receiving classified materials.
They've made up charges, saying he "hacked" a classified system with Bradley Manning, and the two of them "hacked a password" as part of a conspiracy to retrieve classified documents.
Yes, seriously, Assange is being charged with conspiracy to hack a password. It's the only way they could come up with to extradite him.
Don't let a little thing like accurate chronology of events get in the way of a good conspiracy.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
You know, I don't understand why more extreme right wing people didn't vote for Hillary. They typically say they want a strong president, and evidently Hillary is in charge of every intelligence agency and enforcement organization, even while not actually holding public office. Such that those organizations dare not even speak her name. Her power is so complete that she can kill people who she has never met, and force every news agency on earth, even fox, not to carry the story. She can run an international pedophile ring out of a pizza parlor and never even get investigated.
In short, her power to control the nation is basically supernatural. Hillary is the witch in every wardrobe. She is the horror under every bed.
One would think that kind of competence would appeal to someone all about authority.
"As to Assange, he cannot be held criminally liable for any of the classified data leaked to Wikileaks and published by him on the site."
You must be kidding.
He's not kidding. And it's true.
If you never got a security clearance, then you never signed away your first amendment rights. Which means you can publish any classified information that lands in your lap.
The key is the information must "land in your lap". If you become an active participant in the leak (direct what to leak, offer a reward, provide technical help, etc), then you've crossed the line into being a co-conspirator.