This is about the 10th time you've posted anti-assange stuff on here. It's quite clear you don't like the guy
I will point out that this "consipiricy theory" of a secret grand jury inditement against him has now been confirmed in two places: in the Stratfor emails, and now last week in Australian Intelligence cables obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. Both credible sources.
His fears of facing life imprisonment or execution in the US if he goes to Sweden to contest a charge of "lesser rape" that carries 4 years if proven seem quite reasonable to me(this charge does not exist under English law, and is highly doubtful the police here would seek a conviction here under any charge as we have a additional test of "reasonable expectation of consent" that doesn't exist in the Swedish legislation).
In the last 12 years the US has shown a disregard for international law for people who have embarassed them far less than Assange. For example, the drone assassinations of foreign nationals in neutral countries without trial or permission that continues today. what makes you think they will follow due process now instead of bullying an ally like sweden into handing Assange over when they get the opportunity? Sweden has refused to release an unequivical statement to say they will not do this. They just say they will act under international obligations, but this could be interpretted as obligations to the US as easily as European convention. I don't know if he is going to be any safer should he get to ecuador, but this is his call.
(
cumquat may will not be commenting further on the allegations, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 18:21,
Reply)
Oh I'm sure it's more than 10...
But the focus here is an M.P being a bit hazy on what rape is.
Personally I think Assange was wrong to release the cables in the way that he did and if it's true they led to the Arab spring he has blood on his hands.
I'm all for those countries overthrowing dictators but could I make the call that led to 10's of thousands of people dying? That's a big one for someone with no democratic mandate.
(
Cerebus Sticky! Sticky! Stick! Stick!, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 18:46,
Reply)
I don't think he made the call if that's the case, he just let people know the call had been made.
(
Dawn Of The Bread $$$$ E-THUG 4 LIFE - THAT'S HOW I SCROLL $$$$, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 18:54,
Reply)
I support wikileaks myself. I think there has been a big move in recent times for governement to be unaccountable
How you can have a democracy if they don't tell you what they're doing? How do you make an informed vote if they lie to you and conceal huge amounts of what they're up to? The more transparency, the more the accountable the bastard politicians will be.
but if you think he should be punished for it, then I can see why you don't cut him slack on his sweden dodging ways and that's fair enough
(
cumquat may will not be commenting further on the allegations, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 23:46,
Reply)
He does not face the prospect of execution if he goes to the US.
This is for two reasons. First, the execution bit (AFAIK) relates to the idea that he committed treason. That idea was briefly popular among a few right-wing idiots; but it's utterly nonsensical.
Second - and more important - Sweden (like the UK) is bound by the ECHR, and is legally precluded from extraditing a person to a country in which that extradition is for a charge that brings the death sentence.
As for Sweden being bullied: Ecuador is massively reliant on trade with the US for the sake of its economy. Sweden isn't. Which is the more likely to be leaned on?
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 18:48,
Reply)
From looking at how Bradley Manning has
been treated, I'm sure Assange is equally afraid of a similar fate. We always conveniently forget the US was using torture and illegal extradition and more importantly, detaining without trial. All very dangerous and completely un-democratic.
Added to this Stratfor which is another terrifying development :S
(
dazbrilliantwhites has been meaning to change this..., Tue 21 Aug 2012, 18:59,
Reply)
...
Bradley Manning's case is importantly different from Assange's. Notably, being a member of the US armed forces, he would have had obligations to the US armed forces that Assange doesn't. This is not to say that Manning has been well treated - just that his story is only tangentially relevant here.
Assange might be afraid of all kinds of stuff. That doesn't mean his fear is warranted, or that it should make the blindest difference to the legal process.
And the fact that it's non-democratic bounces off me completely. I've been here long enough, and sounded off enough, for it to be pretty common knowledge that I have no love for democracy; but even if I did, it would make absolutely no difference to the legal or moral merits of the US' complaint against Assange.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 19:35,
Reply)
^this
Ecuador is massively reliant on an economic agreement with the United States, to the tune of almost a hundred thousand jobs I read somewhere. The United States would probably find it far easier in the long run to get their claws on him there than from Sweden.
Rafael Correa won't be in office forever. A far more US friendly President could get elected and simply hand him over, or even covertly co-operate with a US military operation to get Julian Assange.
(
Jahled Three shades of black, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 19:01,
Reply)
I would also imagine Assange does not plan on sticking in Ecuador forever.
On top of that he does know it's in his interest to have the rape charges cleared and I can imagine he will work towards this as mouch as he can outside of sweden.
(
dazbrilliantwhites has been meaning to change this..., Tue 21 Aug 2012, 19:05,
Reply)