Assange to UK cops: No, I will not come out of my Ecuadorean embassy

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is in no hurry to depart his refuge inside the embassy of Ecuador, in London, where he has been holed up for about a week. British authorities are demanding that he do so, and head straight to a police station as part of his extradition process to be questioned in Sweden about sex crime allegations. But if he complies, police may arrest him immediately, because he has breached the terms of his bail.

Reuters reports:

On Thursday, British police summoned Assange to a London police station, demanding he leave the embassy. But Assange later told BBC television in a telephone interview: "Our advice is that asylum law both internationally and domestically in the UK takes precedence to extradition law, so the answer is almost certainly not."

Boing Boing editor/partner and tech culture journalist Xeni Jardin hosts and produces Boing Boing's in-flight TV channel on Virgin America airlines (#10 on the dial), and writes about living with breast cancer. Diagnosed in 2011. @xeni on Twitter. email: xeni@boingboing.net.

More at Boing Boing

Ants and Stars: Bruce Sterling and Jasmina Tesanovic visit the Sardinia Radio Telescope in Italy

The Snowden Principle

perch

Helicopter evacuation, it’s the only way.
- gijoel
  
  Get to da Choppa
- http://2012diaries.blogspot.com/ tristan eldritch
  
  Not quite. I think it should go down EXACTLY like this:
  
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66CnAFCoCrA
- Antinous / Moderator
  
  An unwanted helicopter. In London. During the lead up to the Olympics.
  
  You do know that they’re already installing rocket launchers on apartment buildings?
- Cowicide
  
  Are we 100% positive he’s even at the Ecuadorian embassy? Maybe he’s just pretending to be there while he escapes in some sort of disguise.
p9ooo

There has to be a secret tunnel around here somewhere. Tim Powers would know what to do.
http://twitter.com/MissingString31 MissingString

Fire him out of a cannon! Science is up to the task!
nomad411

What could people, we, do to help him?
- awjt
  
  Ten thousand look-alike Assanges show up on the steps of the Ecuadorean embassy and he is subsumed into the multitudes.
  - http://disqus.com/Kimmoth/ Kimmo
    
    More feasibly, hundreds of peeps in grey wigs and Guy Fawkes masks turn up, with an extra mask.
  - t3kna2007
    
    I like it. Scored with Nina Simone’s Sinnerman.
  - George Michaelson
    
    google “kettling” and try again. F A I L
    - ocker3
      
      Yeah, but those protests were going for a while, if it’s flash-mobby enough, they won’t have time.
      - http://twitter.com/Prentiz Richard Coates
        
        Moreover, Google conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and assisting an offender…
  - awjt
    
    I just wanted to type the word “Assanges.” (again)
- Slartibartfatsdomino
  
  Now that this is a state-to-state matter and no longer just a legal matter between the UK and Sweden (not that it was ever just that, but formally speaking), I decided to write to the UK Foreign Ministry as a concerned American and urge them to recognize the great danger that Assange faces from US extradition to cruel and unusual punishment if he steps one foot in Sweden and therefore to allow, at the very least, Assange to fly to Ecuador. I also suggested that the UK government should grant Assange asylum from the US its own self, even though there’s no way they’re ever going to do it.
  
  I also wrote Obama, Holder, my Senators and my Reps, saying that the US should provide guarantees that they will not extradite Assange from Sweden, as he has said repeatedly that he would go and answer questions about the alleged assaults if he didn’t face such danger from the US, but of course that’s never going to happen.
  
  And I wrote the Ecuadorian Foreign Ministry, praising them for their actions so far and urging them to grant Assange asylum.
  
  That was all I could think of to do, especially with limited funds.
  - nomad411
    
    Though I have to say I really love the look-alike plan, I have to say, you just blew my mind. Good show!
  - iCowboy
    
    Sweden is a full signatory of the European Convention on Human Rights and the US would be required to offer a long list of guarantees before the Swedes would be allowed to extradite Assange.
irksome

I’m going out on a limb in assuming the embassy has enough mirrors to suit young Julian.
- Slartibartfatsdomino
  
  Haha, he’s vain! LOL!! I bet he thinks this thread is about him!
  
  I guess I can ignore all of the serious issues of Constitutional and International Law that are raised by his case, then.
  
  Oh, wait, no I can’t.
  - http://www.facebook.com/people/Kristofer-Peterson/100003624673897 Kristofer Peterson
    
    What issues of Constitutional and International Law? I admit, my natural anti-authoritarianism initially made me very skeptical on this, but what it comes down to, is he is a selfish little t**t, and he needs to answer for what he did in Sweden. Period. Hippy bullshit aside, rape is still rape, and the accusation deserves to be answered.
    - Slartibartfatsdomino
      
      Freedom of the press, accountability for war crimes and crimes against the peace, and torture, to name just a few of the big ones. As I said elsewhere in this thread, he and his lawyers have repeatedly said that he will go answer any questions and (nonexistent) charges in Sweden if the US will provide a guarantee against political persecution and torture.
      
      My position is that the US should provide that guarantee and then the Swedish justice system can move forward on these allegations. If at that point, Assange refuses to go to Sweden, then I will join the calls for him to be tossed out of the Ecuadorean embassy and sent to Sweden.
      - Omniogignes
        
        That is just one of the ever changing requests. US is not a party to the accusations against Assange, no matter what distractions for the issue are used.
      - Slartibartfatsdomino
        
        @Omniogignes:disqus your objection has been answered already numerous times. The current formal parties do not matter if Assange is not provided guarantees that he will not be whisked off to the US once he enters the Swedish justice system, as there are active, documented efforts to prosecute him in the United States and as Sweden has been concretely implicated in turning over individuals to the US rendition program in the past. Neither the US NOR Sweden has been willing to provide him those guarantees. If it’s not an issue, why don’t they just provide those guarantees and prove it’s a distraction? The question answers itself.
    - http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002042736154 Ah El
      
      But rape by swedish standards is not rape by other countries standards. Here in Germany, we talk about rape if someone forces another person to have sex or conduct sexual acts. In Assanges case, the sex was consentual at first – only later when both women realized Assange had not only slept with one of them, but with both, they decided to go to the police.
      That doesn’t sound like rape to me, but like revenge.
      - http://twitter.com/Prentiz Richard Coates
        
        Which would be fine if his actions had taken place in Germany – but he was in Sweden at the time and governed by Swedish laws. BTW IMHO what Assange is accused of in both cases could well be seen as rape under UK laws, had the offence occured here, so I don’t think its as if there’s a particularly weird Swedish justice thing going on.
      - Camp Freddie
        
        He’s accused of rape.
        Rape as defined in UK law and Swedish law.
        Two women claim they did NOT consent to sex. In one case he had sex with a sleeping woman. The UK extradition judge ruled that this is rape.
        
        He may be innocent of course, but he’s not being extradited because a condom broke. At least not according to the extradition arguments submitted by Sweish prosecutors.
    - http://www.ecoevolution.org/ Ian G
      
      Sexual assaults are serious, and should be considered so, agreed. But the way this is being conducted raises eyebrows. As I understand it, Assange isn’t charged with anything, a prosecutor simply wants to question him. Assange agreed to answering all questions provided he didn’t have to go to Sweden because of the extradition threat. The prosecutor refused.
      
      If this is a simple sexual assault/rape case, why prevent Assange from being interviewed in the U.K.? His lawyers offered his statements, and the prosecutor could have traveled there to interrogate him if it were a serious charge. Interview him in the U.K., charge him if reasonable suspicion exists, and then extradite him that way. Why all the subterfuge from the Swedish prosecutor if the charges are above board?
      
      He could be guilty, and he could serve time in Sweden for criminal acts. However, he would not face the death penalty as he would should Sweden extradite him to United States for prosecution under Obama’s Justice Department, which is extremely likely whether he is charged in Sweden or not. Most EU countries don’t extradite to places where there is a potential for execution, but this clearly is a case of the Obama Administration trying to exert pressure to arrest Assange, and not just a simple rape/sexual assault case.
      - http://twitter.com/michiexile michiexile
        
        «As I understand it, Assange isn’t charged with anything, a prosecutor simply wants to question him. Assange agreed to answering all questions provided he didn’t have to go to Sweden because of the extradition threat. The prosecutor refused.
        
        If this is a simple sexual assault/rape case, why prevent Assange from being interviewed in the U.K.?»
        
        Because of Swedish procedural structures, is why. They have to interrogate a suspect before issuing formal charges. The insistence to be allowed to question and subsequently charge (or not) *on Swedish soil* is pretty much by the procedural handbook for Swedish pre-trial proceedings.
        
        «Why all the subterfuge from the Swedish prosecutor if the charges are above board?»
        
        Because of Swedish procedural structures, is why. A pre-trial investigation is supposed to happen in complete secrecy, and failure on this makes a case essentially untriable; this already screwed up the investigation of the murder of Prime Minister Olof Palme, and with this much international attention, there is just NO way the Swedish prosecutors will accept any more screwups in this case than have already happened.
  - ultranaut
    
    I wrote a totally witty reply about honeypots and dual action with sexy Swedes but boingboings shitastic comment system ated it
- nomad411
  
  What use is this comment? He’s blond and pretty, so f*ck him?
  - irksome
    
    “He’s blonde and pretty” and a hero to the many who would normally be up in arms over someone utilizing extra-ordinary means to avoid a rape charge if the suspect wasn’t “blonde and pretty” and a hero to the many.
http://grumer.org/ Avram Grumer

Is there a reason the Swedes can’t visit London to question him?
- http://lemoutan.blogspot.com/ Lemoutan
  
  Not going to happen. They’d have to do it from outside and shout their questions at him. It would involve public disclosures concerning certain species of swallow and they’d be at risk of farts in their general direction.
- ocker3
  
  Apparently there’s precedent in Swedish law, but they’re electing not to, which kind of leads towards the extradition theory.
- ZikZak
  
  They don’t even have to visit – he offered to answer questions via teleconference and they never got back to him. It’s not really about getting answers to the questions, or even finding justice for those who claim sexual assault. It’s about using international bureaucracy to target political enemies.
- Camp Freddie
  
  He’s not wanted for “questioning”, he’s wanted for the purposes of pursuing a prosecution (IANAL, so the exact wording may be a bit different).
  Swedish law isn’t like UK or US law. One of the phases of Swedish due process has no English law equivalent, so it can be broadly translated as “questioning”, but it’s not like in UK/USA where it means a little chat down at the station.
gigasquid

Good on you Julian. Don’t give in to the military and government criminals in the US. Many of them should be behind bars for their war crimes, lies and deception.
- Morningstar9
  
  “Progressive” men don’t give a shit about sexual assault when one of their heroes do it.
  - http://2012diaries.blogspot.com/ tristan eldritch
    
    “Conservative” men don’t give a shit about “innocent until proven guilty” when one of their enemies needs hanging, drawing, and quartering.
    - Morningstar9
      
      I’m not a conservative, asshole. I’m a feminist who’s fucking sick of women’s well-being getting thrown under the bus by fauxgressive men.
      - http://2012diaries.blogspot.com/ tristan eldritch
        
        Let me amend my comment: feminists who are fucking sick of women’s well-being getting thrown under the bus by fauxgressive men don’t give a shit about “innocent until proven guilty” when one of their enemies needs hanging, drawing, and quartering. Or one of them doesn’t, at any rate.
      - Slartibartfatsdomino
        
        Look, Assange has repeatedly stated that he would go and answer questions about the ALLEGED and UNCHARGED assaults if the US would provide a guarantee that once he is in Sweden he won’t be arrested in furtherance of the US’s smash Wikipedialeaks campaign. This is a very real and present danger and one look at the case of Bradley Manning suggests very strongly what they will do to Assange. Even proven criminals, including rapists, have an international right to asylum when they legitimately fear political persecution and torture. Assange is far from a proven criminal. As I said, he hasn’t even been charged. If anyone is throwing women’s well-being under the bus in this case, it’s the US government, which is obstructing the investigation of the Swedish case by not providing guarantees against persecution of Assange for his Wikileaks activities.
        
        [edit] Adding a bit later: I could also make insinuations about fauxminists that seek to harness concerns about gender oppression to the furtherance of imperialist agendas, because we’ve certainly seen quite a bit of that over the past decade or two.
      - ocker3
        
        The strange behaviour of the women in question and various Swedish legal system people doesn’t worry you in regards to the veracity of the charges? And if the US doesn’t want to extradite him, why won’t they say so?
    - Omniogignes
      
      The irony of “innocent until proven guilty” seems to be missed by one to many. The is an importance for Assange to address the accusations once and for all.
      
      There a more important issue. That is the belief that Assange is “innocent,” but the women, the prosecutor, and Sweden are “guilty.” Worse that “guilt” is based on distortions and omissions.
      
      The “hanging, drawing, and quartering” of both women have been disturbing. The accusations between the women and Assange, is those three peoples business.
      
      This issue could have ended, but Assange is insistent on dragging it out. It is understandable that the accusations have caused Assange stress. What needs to be remembered is that it is the prosecution to prove their case, not Assange to prove his innocence.
      - GlyphGryph
        
        I’m sorry – have the lives of the women in question been destroyed? Are they likely to face torture and extended imprisonment at the behest of a foreign government with no involvement in the case? Have they been forced to flee as fugitives, or face any actual penalties at all, over the course of the case?
        
        What, exactly, are they being found guilty of, and how have they been hung, drawn, and quartered because of it?
      - http://2012diaries.blogspot.com/ tristan eldritch
        
        Omniogignes – my point is simply this: calling Assange a rapist or guilty of sexual assault at this point is no more justifiable than calling his accusers liars – this is a matter, which, as you imply, which can only be known for certain by the three parties to the accusation, and can at best be resolved within the framework of the proper legal proceedings. And Assange submitting himself to those legal proceedings is invariably complicated by the danger of him receiving criminal Bradley Manning-type treatment in the event of extradition to the US. I don’t believe that automatically assuming his guilt is any more justifiable than assuming his innocence – and the issue is complicated by the fact that, even if guilty, he faces the prospect of more severe treatment than would ever have been warranted by that in the event of extradition to the US.
    - Omniogignes
      
      @TristanEldtritch:disqus
      What is being said is that Assange should defend himself in Sweden, and the charges are serious. This avoidance to defend himself has created doubt in Assange’s character for some.
      
      - Criminal Bradley Manning-type treatment.
      The courts have ruled on certain treatment of prisoners as being a violation of their rights, but have allowed a few of them for specific scenarios. The legality has to be determined through the courts, or a strong ruling of its illegality. This doesn’t preclude in the belief that Manning’s treatment is unjustified.
      
      - In the even of extradition to the US
      So far there are no crimes US can charge Assange with, let alone if the want to extradite him.
      
      - Those legal proceedings is invariably complicated
      Legal proceedings are invariably complicated. However, the point of the comment is understood. The allegations surround agreeable friendships that resulted in sexual assault complaints from two women against Assange. That is as complicated as it gets.
      
      Attempts to mix distinct legal problems together is unfair for Assange, and everyone involved.
      
      The point isn’t the assumption of Assange’s innocence. It is the assumption that others are guiltly while demanding “innocent until proven guilty” for Assange. This includes this persistent guilt by “six degrees of” association.
  - Omniogignes
    
    The first thought was “It is nothing but denial.” However, remembering when Assange apologist were calling it “sex by surprise” and other comments make your assertion correct.
spejic

This story of Julian Assange would make an absolutely fantastic musical. It has that “Jesus Christ Superstar” feeling of Judas’ worry about Jesus’ personality becoming far larger than the mission he started.
pConD

“Not by the hair of my chinny-chin-chin.”
CognitiveDissident

I don’t know how he’ll get out, but how the heck did he get in?
Aren’t they, like, watching him?
It must have been the Beatle wig.
Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, that’s it.
gregarious

See, the first thing you do is get three blond haired Australians and paint 1, 2, and 4 on them…
P1rat3

When his plane to Ecuador is ready to leave from Heathrow all he has to do is enter their car with the D type full diplomatic immunity plates and drive to the door of the plane. If the UK police dare to interfere you can’t imagine the diplomatic chill that would send around the world.
- iCowboy
  
  Except – diplomats have to go through UK Border Control which is very firmly on UK territory. As soon as Assange stepped out of the car he will be liable to arrest.
Ethan Campbell

I think most people here got it backward…

It’s not about Sweden and the US using rape allegations as a pretext to get their hands on him for espionage.

It’s about Assange using the bogus claim it’s about extraditing him for espionage to escape answering before judges of rape allegations.
- Slartibartfatsdomino
  
  If that were true, then the US could very quickly remedy the situation by providing guarantees that he will not be subject to extradition while in Sweden. The US refuses to do so. One can draw conclusions from that.
  
  Goodness, for all the great concern about sexual assault that arises whenever the Assange case comes up, I don’t see a similar level of concern about the current epidemic of rape and cover-ups of rape in the US armed forces. One can draw conclusions from that as well.
  - Ethan Campbell
    
    Seriously ?
    
    First, there is no relation between the two cases, so the US have no interest in giving guarantees not to do something they don’t intend to do anyway, to allow a case they don’t care about to go ahead, it’s a red herring, a clever ploy by Assange to justify his unwillingness to face the real case.
    
    Second, so just because there are worse rape cases not being covered/persecuted, we should let Assange have a free pass because you know, he seems like a nice guy, not like these pigs in the armed forces.
    
    Is that your definition of justice ? I don’t know if I should pity or despise you.
    - Slartibartfatsdomino
      
      Ok, first of all, I’m going to ignore all the words you put in my mouth, as they should be readily apparent to any reasonably competent and honest reader.
      
      Secondly, there is quite a bit of evidence that the US is proceeding with attempts to target Assange in the US press.
      
      I AM NOT ARGUING for a free pass. I am arguing that without a guarantee of US disinvolvement, it is perfectly reasonable for Assange to fear being nabbed by the US considering the great record the US government has already built up in the harassment and prosecution of Wikileaks-connected figures, your apparent ability to read the minds of the US national security apparatus in contrast to their actual actions notwithstanding. Whether he’s a nice guy or not has nothing to do with the pertinent issues.
      
      So, you can pity me and despise me as you like, but apparently you will be doing so based on positions that I do not hold.
      - Ethan Campbell
        
        First, the point you seem to be missing, then a more direct answer.
        
        IF Assange asked those guarantees from Sweden, that they won’t respond to US extradition demands while in custody for the duration of the alleged rape case, then I would entirely support it, it’s an entirely different and rational proposal, but asking it from a third party, not part of the case concerned is nothing but a red-herring.
        
        There still is no clear and present danger, the US extradition argument is still based only on a lot of hot air and connecting a LOT of dots before it can actually happen, or it requires a conspirationnist view of the world making his abduction and anal probing by the little grey men from outer space just as plausible.
        The US extradition hypothesis is based on an assumption of competence and clever scheming, actions and results of the US national security apparatus as you call it tells us nothing can be further removed from the truth.
      - Slartibartfatsdomino
        
        @google-95dbf440e717bb58f5f18082cf412ed8:disqus (not allowed to reply directly to your comment at this point in the thread, apparently).
        
        Just google “Assange wants guarantees from Sweden” and you will see that he has done so. Those guarantees have not been forthcoming. So I guess you now have changed your position, as you claimed you would. Or perhaps not, but that would make you a dishonest debater, now wouldn’t it?
        
        And it is not “conspirationnist” (sic) nor excessively beholden to conspiratorial theory, to use a more linguistically correct phrase, to suggest that the US government has been proceeding with programs to indict and prosecute Assange. There is plenty of evidence that there is an ongoing grand jury investigation against Assange. See here for example: http://www.salon.com/2011/06/09/wikileaks_27/
        
        So, both your points vanish in a puff of smoke.
      - Ethan Campbell
        
        Stupid Disqus system :)
        
        Anyway, let’s pick it…
        
        1) But he has asked Sweden…
        
        Indeed, but now the argument he and others use is for the US to give guarantees, when they should push for Sweden rather than going on that wild goose chase with the US, they are wasting their time and looking bad by pursuing an absurd line of defense.
        
        2) But the US are doing things…
        
        How much of that is concrete, how much of that lead to legally-sound ACTIONS against ASSANGE, how much time did they have to get to that point ?
        
        Moreover, it tends to blast your alarmist viewpoint, after all, they appeared before the Grand Jury, didn’t cooperate much and still walk free, despite their close connection to the larger case.
        Why would they detain Assange (oh, because he proved through the whole charade he was an unreliable scumbag ready to use every trick in the book to avoid facing the consequences of his actions) ?
        
        Hell, they haven’t processed Manning yet, even though his case is fairly simple in comparison (and yes, I think the Manning situation is a bloody disgrace, whether or not he is guilty and whatever you think of what he supposedly did (useful idiot, traitor or heroic whistle-blower)).
  - Seraphim_72
    
    “If that were true, then the US could very quickly remedy the situation by”
    
    Taking him. Do you really believe that the US needs to backdoor this mess? Do you really believe that if the US really wanted him turned over that the Brits wouldn’t just hand him off? Your portrayal of the US as both Machiavellian and inept at the same time smacks of the best conspiracy theories.
  - Rindan
    
    If that were true, then the US could very quickly remedy the situation by providing guarantees that he will not be subject to extradition while in Sweden. The US refuses to do so. One can draw conclusions from that.
    
    The only conclusion you can draw is that the US can never ever make such assurances and never makes such assurances for anyone. The executive branch of the US simply doesn’t have the legal authority to order the judicial branch not to prosecute someone. Hell, the judicial branch can’t order itself not to prosecute someone. This is separation of powers and very much a good thing. It also means that the executive branch can’t order the judicial branch to not investigate their friends and allies. That is the whole point of separation of powers.
    
    The best the US could do is that Obama could personally offer a verbal guarantee that if he is the president while Assange is being charged, he promises to offer a pardon. That is very obviously not going to happen because I assume Obama wants to get reelected, and personally stepping into this is an assured way to not get reelected.
atimoshenko

So basically we’re saying that Sweden is a banana republic with kangaroo courts – that Assange could never have been extradited for espionage to the US from the UK, but that Sweden’s government is an American lapdog.

Would the people that Assange has pissed off be willing to resort to dirty tricks against him? Definitely. But to baselessly paint a country’s entire legal system to be a sham, while simultaneously discounting offhand the suffering potentially endured by rape victims just because of inconvenient of timing boggles the mind.

Assange would be justified in hiding out in an Ecuadoran embassy if some moves were put in motion to extradite him for espionage or treason, or whatnot. He is not justified in what he is doing right now.
- Slartibartfatsdomino
  
  Sigh, no. What people have been trying to point out is that under Sweden’s system, Assange would have to remain in custody for the entire duration of proceedings in Sweden. This means, that even if he is completely cleared, the US has an opportunity to immediately seek his extradition before his release, at which point he would remain in custody and never be afforded the opportunity to seek asylum. And Sweden has a history of being far more accommodating to US extradition requests than the UK.
  
  I’m going to shout this time because it’s a very simple point and I’ve been saying it again and again in this very thread: ONCE AGAIN, THE US CAN REMEDY THIS SITUATION BY PROVIDING GUARANTEES THAT THEY WILL NOT SEEK EXTRADITION FROM SWEDEN IF ASSANGE GOES THERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ALLEGED ASSAULTS. THE US GOVERNMENT IS POINTEDLY NOT DOING SO.
  - Ethan Campbell
    
    Once again, apart from hot air at the start of the Wikileaks debacle, the US never did anything to seek extradition, they did not even go as far as check whether or not they had a legal case to seek extradtion.
    
    The only country to actively seek extradition in the Assange case was Sweden for a completely unrelated case, and the only people keeping the US extradition story alive have been Assange and his followers, no one else gives a damn about the bleached egomaniac anymore.
    - Slartibartfatsdomino
      
      And, ONCE AGAIN, if it is indeed the case that the US is not seeking extradition and your remarkably credulous understanding of the US position is correct, then it should be very simple for the US to provide diplomatic guarantees, at which point, I will call for Assange to go to Sweden to answer the questions posed by the Swedish justice system.
      - Ethan Campbell
        
        And once again, IT’S NOT THE US WHO SHOULD PROVIDE GUARANTEES, AND SHOULD BE ASKED FOR THEM.
        
        It’s bloody Sweden… that’s why the whole argument is a red herring.
        
        Just because it’s what Assange is asking for doesn’t mean it’s what he needs (if his intention is indeed to avoid US extradition).
    - Slartibartfatsdomino
      
      @google-95dbf440e717bb58f5f18082cf412ed8:disqus Responded to this point already. He has asked for those guarantees from Sweden. They have not been provided. Your argument is the one that is failing.
    - Slartibartfatsdomino
      
      “the only people keeping the US extradition story alive have been Assange and his followers”
      
      I’m sure you’re able to keep this belief in mind by thinking of anyone that is worried about this situation as a “follower.”
      
      THERE IS AN ACTIVE GRAND JURY PROCESS GOING ON, THE US GOVERNMENT HAS PROVEN REMARKABLY VINDICTIVE TOWARDS BRADLEY MANNING AND OTHER WHISTLE-BLOWERS (PARTICULARLY THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH WIKILEAKS), AND BOTH THE US AND SWEDEN HAVE BEEN ENTIRELY UNWILLING TO OFFER GUARANTEES AGAINST US EXTRADITION.
      
      You have clearly developed remarkable (actually, pretty standard) cognitive dissonance management skills.
      
      I’m done arguing this with you, between your various ad hominems, straw men, ignorance of settled facts, and willful obtuseness, I’ve decided there’s no actual point. Cheerio. I rest my case.
      - Ethan Campbell
        
        Apart from Manning, how many people related to the Wikileaks clusterfuck are rotting in a cell for no good reason (and in Manning case it’s probably only because he is military personnel).
        
        How much of the Grand Jury grandstanding has been about obtaining a case for Assange’s extradition, how much has been about obtaining a case against Manning (clue, in order, not much and a lot more).
        
        And it’s not ignorance of settled facts, it’s not reading them with the same interpretation grid as you do…
        
        As for straw men… aren’t you one ?
      - Slartibartfatsdomino
        
        @google-95dbf440e717bb58f5f18082cf412ed8:disqus I said I was done with this, and now the exigencies of time and self-nourishment, beyond my frustrations with the argument, mean that I must hold to that.
        
        But I will chuckle at your final point and suggest that “With the things I been thinkin’, I could be another Lincoln, if I only had a brain.’
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6LOJDBXCDHL5MVQQRLOCCJ35AY alexb

I think that there are some interesting parallels between the sexual assault case against Assange and the case of Dominique Strauss-Klein (DSK).
If we look at DSK, in France, it was widely considered that he’d been set up by his political enemies in order to prevent him from running for higher office. Subsequently numerous similar cases have been revealed and he’s now been implicated in all sorts of sexual behaviour which you would think a high ranking politician might have the good sense to avoid.
So to some extent sexual smears work very effectively (perhaps if only to get troublesome characters out of the way – see also Burlesconi) and it seems likely that the maid, whether she was a honey trap or not, was denied justice. Had he been some regular joe, the case would have gone to court. The US justice system, by presenting so much information in public, prior to trial, ansd allowing DSK’s very high priced lawyers the chance to smear the complainant, denies everyone the right to “due process”. I suspect in the UK the press and legal team would have been ruled to have been in contempt if they’d tried similar behaviour – I’m not a lwayer so can’t say.

So with Assange we could argue that he may be guilty, or he may have been trapped, but from his point of view I’m sure he’s looking at what happened with Strauss-Klein and wondering if the same thing has happened to him. Remember, he knows what happened on the night, if things didn’t happen as his accusers said, then he would definitely not want to put himself in a position where he might end up in prison for a lengthy stretch. The extradition to the US is just further pressure on him.

I hope that this does go to court and the evidence is laid before a jury and they have the chance to look at it. But I think that yes, this might be the behaviour of a guilty man, or it might also be the behaviour of someone who truly knows he’s been set up.

He may be the only person who knows the truth.
Guest

This situation is entirely figged up. And several people in this thread – who should know better – spend time soaking in their political beliefs and in order to uphold said beliefs, struggle to acknowledge the complexity of the situation. Which is understandable because there is so much at stake.

Any other person who did what Assange is alleged to have done would not have been pursued to this extent. That is pretty obvious. On the other hand, god damn Assange for assuming so much responsibility and then completely fucking up and making himself a target through some pretty questionable behaviour.

The whole situation is SNAFU and no power structures get undermined and the powerful stay powerful and the disempowered stay disempowered. And you guys are (well meaning) mice and you fight it out in the comments. And that is just how the powers that be like it.
terrymct

If the US government wanted Assange that badly, why not extradite him from the UK rather than supposedly set up a complex plot with (again supposedly) fake claim of rape and an intermediate extradition to Sweden? The US and the UK have been quite chummy for almost two hundred years and do extradite people back and forth.

The whole suggested conspiracy fails the Occam’s Razor test.
- http://Valanx.org David Deutsch
  
  False – Back then, he was not in the UK, he was in Sweden.
- ZikZak
  
  Your comment fails the “I don’t know much about the situation, and since part of it doesn’t make sense to me, I think I know the answer” test.
hakuin

I remember a time when Julian would have been grabbed, squeezed and flushed by the CIA within days of the Wikileaks initial data dump.

Has not the web progressed us?
Camp Freddie

I think Assange has really screwed up here.
By seeking asylum he has breached bail conditions.
If he fails to gain asylum, he will be arrested, jailed and extradited.
The prosecution in Sweden will make a huge deal about him evading justice, which might be enough to sway the court to convict in a case that might otherwise have been easily dismissed as “just her word against his”.

The US won’t extradite him because he’s broken no laws in the UK or Sweden – and probably not even in the USA. It would be a PR disaster, re-opening old wounds and straining diplomatic relations, while also being a terrible black eye for Obama if the extradition was refused.

Unless someone finds links to pirated mp3′s in the documents he’s leaked. If he’s done that then he’s fucked.
Teller

Note to embassy: Hide the admins!
Anton Jakimenko

He should go to North Corea, there they cant get him. :)
http://dailygrail.com/ Red Pill Junkie

None of you have mentioned the surprising cognitive dissonance of Assange seeking asylum in Ecuador — oh yes, because Rafael Correa is such a PALADIN of the freedom of press :-/
http://www.facebook.com/people/Neoracer-Xox/1037144278 Neoracer Xox

Spill the beans on any UFO related material, before they kill you for it.
CognitiveDissident

You do raise valid points.
I do not have the answers, and I am aware that “justice delayed is justice denied”.

I don’t know all the detail of this case, but sex IS a commonly used character-assassination/espionage/blackmail/political tool. It is in the very real realm of possibility that these women are in the employ ($$$) of others trying to “get” Assange. Maybe they are, but maybe they’re not and he’s a rapist. All I know, is that this is a special case, but that doesn’t make the possibility of injustice any easier to accept. But let’s assume that he is being set up, the people doing it could absolutely count on people coming to the defense of the victims. And with the available information on the case, it is perfectly logical and understandable that people come to their defense. But at this point, there is simply no way to tell the truth. You have to weigh the possibilities against each other, could a trial be held “in absentia”? This is a conundrum. You have to admit it is convenient that these rape charges could benefit those seeking to extradite him, but that certainly isn’t proof.
http://twitter.com/writebastard Ian Wood

Although I’m sure it’s flattering for Assange to think of himself as the target of a concerted effort by one or more national governments, at the moment I’m hard-pressed to recall a single thing of lasting consequence he’s ever done that would warrant such action.
Tynam

OK, now you’re doing exactly what tristan was complaining about. Not only is it not proof, it’s a theory so weak that mentioning it is giving it undue credit. The shitty behaviour of the US in no way entitles us to engage us to indulge in victim-blaming or shifts of responsibility.

A woman making a sexual assault charge should be assumed to be motivated by incidents occurring between the two individuals concerned, and nothing else. An international conspiracy to extradite someone would have to be extremely stupid to do it with a sexual assault charge, since sadly it’s the most under-investigate, under-prosecuted, frequently deflected and minimised crime there is, in just about every country.
Slartibartfatsdomino

If that’s true, you either have a memory like a sieve or pay no attention to world events.
ffabian

I don’t want to rule out a coincidence but the timing of the accusations makes me suspicious.
Slartibartfatsdomino

“An international conspiracy to extradite someone would have to be extremely stupid to do it with a sexual assault charge, since sadly it’s the most under-investigate, under-prosecuted, frequently deflected and minimised crime there is, in just about every country.”

Because states never ever ever selectively apply their statutes so as to achieve unconnected state goals? Just because states are notoriously lax in prosecuting sexual assault has no bearing on whether there is reason to believe that this situation is being manipulated by the US and Swedish governments.

The point is that, under Sweden’s system, Assange would have to remain in custody for the entire process of questioning. The very legitimate fear is that Assange gets cleared of the alleged crimes, but since he is in custody, the US then immediately launches extradition proceedings (and believe me, they will have a lawyer in that courtroom) and he never has a chance to seek refuge from the persecution of the US at that point.

In fact, Sweden’s government could be doing exactly what you’re complaining about (not giving a shit about crimes against woman) combined with what Assange’s supporters are worried about (facilitating the political persecution–and likely torture–of a whistle-blower).