Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy - Benjamin Franklin
|
|
|
Julian Assange is a political prisoner
"I DO NOT THINK there is reason to suspect that he committed rape," Sweden's chief prosecutor Eva Finn stated on 21 August this year and yet, four months on, Julian Assange, sits in a UK jail awaiting an extradition hearing.
This August statement and subsequent statements by Sweden's public prosecutor and the timing of other governments' actions are countering an information revolution. As in counter-revolutionaries fighting the revolutionaries.
While the technology revolution that is IT is how we got here, with 250,000 cables being taken from a US government network, the reaction is more like something medieval, as opposed to justice.
For all the furore of website hosting and who allows it and who doesn't and who is prepared to act as a financial institution for Wikileaks and who isn't, what is likely to become the defining aspect of this situation, is not 21st century technology but how a human being is treated by those who are supposed to act within the letter of the law.
Barrister Carl Gardner has written in his head of legal blog that he expects Assange to be extradited to Sweden. He points out that the extradition process is simply about asking whether the individual to be extradited will get a fair trial at their destination. Gardner concludes that is a slam dunk with Sweden.
In reference to the conspiracy theories about Sweden seeking revenge on behalf of the nations embarrassed by the cable leaks, Gardner says that the judge will decide "if extradition is really about punishing him for his political views, or if they might prejudice his trial".
This is going to be difficult to prove, but as perception is everything, in the coming weeks the beliefs of many are more likely to be shaped by the story of how Sweden's authorities brought this situation to the point where there is a need for an extradition hearing.
The defence's case for the extradition hearing is bound to touch upon the events leading up to this. The defence is going to want to bring to people's attention the question of whether extradition is really about a fair trial.
A quick glance at the events of late August gives a good indication that this case has been handled badly from the start and that there can be little confidence in the Swedish authorities.
In the third week of August, Swedish tabloid Expressen published the fact that Sweden's public prosecutor was investigating Assange. Giving Assange's name to the media was in breach of the prosecutor's office's own rules. That week, on Friday 20 August, an arrest warrant was issued for Assange, but then it was withdrawn on the Saturday.
On the Saturday, 21 August, the Swedish chief prosecutor Eva Finn made her statement saying she did not think Assange could be accused of rape. Then on Sunday 22 August, Finn put out a question and answer statement in which she stated, "She had received information on the matter and felt that he could not be accused of rape."
On Monday 23 August, a timeline was published on the prosecutor's website that stated that Finn had started her investigation and already concluded that the rape charge would not stick.
What happened to change the situation a week later was that a different chief prosecutor, the office's director Marianne Nye, was put in charge and she decided to resume the investigation into the sex crime allegations. Ny put out a statement on 1 September saying, "We have reviewed the matter and I believe that in the first part [there] is reason to believe that an offense subject to public prosecution has been committed."
So one has to wonder what happened over the ten days from when Finn said that she did not think Assange could be accused of rape and Ny's decision that the situation had changed?
Ny continued her investigation and every few days the prosecutor's office put out a statement saying that the investigation was ongoing but that Ny could not say when a decision would be taken on whether the investigation would stop or progress further.
On 18 November Ny finally put out a statement saying that Assange must be questioned. However, according to Assange's lawyer, on an edition of the BBC Newsnight programme earlier this month, his client had been trying to answer the prosecutor's questions since August.
On 25 November media reports started circulating that Wikileaks vast horde of cables was going to be leaked. On the 29 November the cables were released and then on 1 December a European arrest warrant was issued by Sweden for Assange.
The judge that determines whether Assange is extradited or not might not care about this timing because his judgement criteria won't take it into account, but the media and everyone looking on can only draw the worst possible conclusion: Assange is being set up and he is already a political prisoner. µ
Share this:
Share
[There is no formal declaration of war upon any nation state therefore legally no you are not at war.]
True, there is no formal declaration of war. However, after 9/11 the US Congress passed a resolution granting wide latitude to the President to pursue the perpetrators, in particular, and other terrorists, in general, who threaten the US. We are waging war in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and other spots around the world. Legalisms are for peacetime not wartime.
[Assange is unlikely to be tried for treason since he is not a citizen of the United States so even US lawmakers would have a hard time getting that charge to stick.]
Australia is participating in International Security Assistance Force, the NATO led force waging war in Afghanistan. Close enough. US lawmakers don't do the charging. It will be the President through the justice department or the defence department or some commandos showing up at his house in the dark of night. Again, legalisms are for peacetime not wartime.
[Despite what you may think the President as commander in chief does NOT have carte Blanche to go riding rough shod across the rest of the world and its citizens, nation states have their own laws and US foreign or internal policy does not extend to nabbing their citizens for US devices.] True during peacetime, not true during wartime. The gloves come off; anything can be done if its purpose is to defeat the enemey.
[you don't wonder that the content of some of the leaked documents is more of an indictment into the actions of the US governmenta and its allies who are supposed to work on behalf o their citzens yet seem to view them more as tax paying fodder?] I think we come off looking pretty good. I have seen mostly good people doing their best in difficult situations.
Again, you are in very good company. The President, his administration, the Democrat party and many Republicans are thinking along the same lines as you. Most of the Western world for that matter. They are trying to apply civilian peacetime procedures during wartime. I don't think it will work, and as time goes on and more atrocities are committed, we may see more wartime policies and procedures come into play.
There is no formal declaration of war upon any nation state therefore legally no you are not at war. Assange is unlikely to be tried for treason since he is not a citizen of the United States so even US lawmakers would have a hard time getting that charge to stick. About the only charge they could make would be if they could prove that he incited or abetted Bradly Manning in his taking of the documents. If the US thought they could prove any of this or have any charges they thought could stick they would have started extradition proceedings already since there is a policy of extradition between the US and UK. Since, hoever Assange is still (afaik) a citizen of Australia the US also have to contend with that, though the aussies are appearing to be more than complian in helping. Despite what you may think the President as commander in chief does NOT have carte Blanche to go riding rough shod across the rest of the world and its citizens, nation states have their own laws and US foreign or internal policy does not extend to nabbing their citizens for US devices. One reason the US hasn't laid such charges as yet could well be related to the mythical bomb that Assange has stashed away that in the event of his extradition would result in the release of documents that would be much more damaging to the US administration that all those released so far put together.
Whilst Guantanamo bay is not yet closed, its operations are suspended so sending him there is still a moot point ;) My big issue is shoot the guy in the head?? seriously? you don't wonder that the content of some of the leaked documents is more of an indictment into the actions of the US governmenta and its allies who are supposed to work on behalf o their citzens yet seem to view them more as tax paying fodder? I agree that there should be some judgement used on wikileaks part as to what docs are released and their impact on individuals in harms way but then one might also suggest that the US choose it's 'conflicts' more wisely infuture.
[A: Guantanamo bay is in the process of closing down...]
Not true. Obama has campaigned on closing it down; he wants to close it down, but he can not. It is too dangerous to put terrorists in civilian neighbourhoods. The electorate will not stand for it. This very liberal Congress would not pass appropriations for it. There is more to this, but mark my words: Gitmo will be in business for a very long time.
[B: What would the justice dept charge him with?]
For starters: 18 U.S.C. 793(e), which provides:
"Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, (etc. etc.) relating to the national defense, ... (which) the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates (etc. etc) the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same (etc) ...
"Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."
There are other crimes he can be charged with such as treason and aiding and abetting the enemy which would qualify him for the death penalty.
Remember this is wartime not peacetime. The president, as commander in chief, has wide latitude in these matters.
[C: Declare him a combatant? how does that work exactly? since he as never carried arms...]
Don't take the combatant part so literally. Aiding and abetting the enemy with stolen information would qualify him.
You are in good company though. Not many people could stomach the death penalty in this kind of case. We really aren't at war yet. I don't know what it would take to get there. Maybe another 9/11 attack or similar atrocity by the enemy.
Whilst I think that the troll seems obvious I think it pertinent to address a couple of your ludicrous points.
A: Guantanamo bay is in the process of closing down so by all means send him there for a nice break in the sun if you wish.
B: What would the justice dept charge him with? he's not hacked anything nor is there any evidence of incitement to commit a treasonous act. Tey are trying to cook some up but it's unlikely they will get anywhere.
C: Declare him a combatant? how does that work exactly? since he as never carried arms nor commited an act that would indicate a combatant status then you're pi$$ing uo the wrong tree.
Yours is a typical knee jerk reaction to what FOX news are portaying every night. Perhaps you should stop using the TV as a primary source for knowledge of world events?
* The first woman being "abused" arranged a party to celebrate Assange one day after the abuse.
* At the party she twittered about how fun she was having, with the accused abuser... deleted by her now but Google cache saved them.
* She also had a blog where she wrote that "false charges" against someone is an OK method of revenge. Titled "seven steps for legal revenge". Also deleted by her.
* The second woman had sex with Assange the day after she was supposedly "raped" by him. And they had breakfast together. And she payed his train ticket.
* Neither of the woman has filed any charges against Assange, it's an individual police officer or the initial prosecutor that did that.
Considering these woman's behavior after they've been "abuse and raped", what do you think?
Why Obama Justice as the sub-head? I don't get it. I don't see anything about the US Justice Department involved in this. This looks like a GB/European thing.
If you're saying the rape charges are bogus and are wrongly being used to punish him for leaking documents, you are right. The authorities should go after him for the leaks directly.
I wish the US Justice Department would get involved in this.
In a more perfect world the US would declare him an enemy combatant, throw him in Guantánamo Bay, give him a military tribunal, and then shoot him in the head. It should all take 3 or 4 weeks.
Broken condom leading somebody to be jailed??!! Or it only applies to all secrets inside broken condom’ used by Assange when he had a sex with US State Department.. Funny thing is a US chasing Journalist for publishing Truth, but same time criticizes China for doing the same...Double standard at finest! Do what I say not what I do.
Whilst I belive assnage to be somehing of an attention seeking nob at times I think some people need some perspective. He is NOT charged with rape, he has been charged with crimes relating to the breaking of a condom during CONSENTUAL sex (considerd a crime albeit an obscure one in Sweden) He is however being held in solitary confinment with restricted access to media, lawyers and the outside world show me another person accused of rape held in such a manner. He has been granted bail but has not been freed as the swedish authorities have appealed. Interpol submit a red flag and chase him across half the continent of Europe and all this for a broken condom?? Either there is something more to his alleged crime, this is ALL a media circus, or there is infact pressure from the US state to keep mr Assange behind bars whilst they think up some excuse to have him legally extradited to the U.S.
Since Sweden has placed charges against him, let's extradite him and allow him to stand trial. Hiding in the U.K. to escape accountability is unacceptable. Justice delayed is justice denied for his victims.
The article details the charges and timeline accurately, the charges, not charges, are charges, maybe charges... and on the basis of a Swedish prosecutor office's confusion/thrashing around jumps to the conclusion Uncle Sam is behind some sinister plot, without a shred of evidence for this conclusion.
Take a deep breath, this is the most public case in Sweden, and the Swedes, unlike the UK, have shown no great eagerness to do Uncle Sam's bidding, more likely Uncle Sam will get a finger in the eye. Then there is the prospect this guy might have actually broken the law in Sweden, date rape isn't viewed the same in Australia.
Assange was a teenage hacker, he's being held on sex charges and he's going to be charged with other offenses. This guy is not a hero at all. He has a history of unsavory acts and it looks like reality has finally caught up to him.
when theRUMMY States USG, means: US Gypsum.
name floating about for long time, located in Neveda. here:
Rumsfeld, who is about to publish his new memoir, “Known and Unknown,” has indicated that his narrative will be juiced by a dump of classified documents. To be sure, he’s NOT compromising U.S. secrets or service members but merely creating some early buzz for the new book, due in February from Sentinel.
As he put it in a tweet, “With my book I will release 100s of supporting docs on a website--many previously classified, but unlike #Wikileaks, all cleared by USG."
We can be fairly sure that what applied to the leakers of yore will not apply to Rumsfeld
looks like msr. assange got assWacked, new law comin' will put new face on gushers. ?guilty before law even exists?
vondrashek leakette.
Wow, we have some really foolish comments by people trying to defend Assange's sex crimes. Anyone who might do thiswould have to be in denial and out of touch with reality. When did sex crimes become a good thing?
Being held for sex crimes has nothing to do with being a political prisoner. Perhaps the story editor is on drugs?
This guy is Obama's friend, he just want's him to come over for a beer!
... has now an entirely new meaning.
You're obviously suffering from Stockholm syndrome. How else could one love an oppressive system? It's a matter of record that the charge is not that of rape, u utter buffoon.
if Assange will wake up one day and find himself in the USA to face 'charges' there. Someone in the States wants his ass. No doubt, at some point Mr. Assange will end up in a body bag. You know, the ones with a 'made in the USA' tag on them.
He should sign a contract during or before penetrating. It is a stupid rule but i follow it and so should he. The contract says you can do whatewrer.
It doesn't matter what the technical name used by law is for rape, aka as forced sex. If Assange is guilty he belongs in prison. Some of you folks can rationalize anything...
"Assange is wanted not for allegations of rape, as previously reported, but for something called "sex by surprise," which he said involves a fine of 5,000 kronor or about $715."
How about we all pitch in and pay the fine and the story's over ?
I mean , why go through all this for 715 bucks ? Sounds silly to me :)
Speaking of clues Ben....you has none!
the charge is not that of rape. According to a statement made by Assanges lawyer "Assange is wanted not for allegations of rape, as previously reported, but for something called "sex by surprise," which he said involves a fine of 5,000 kronor or about $715."
At worst you are a troll, at best you are just a plain idiot.
Assange was arrested on rape charges. He is not a political prisoner. Trying to slant the news does not make it truthful. Being in denial does not change reality. It's time to buy a clue because the world isn't going to change to concur with your beliefs.
Interesting terrorist training cells the CIA have in Sweden - there is at least one whose specialty is creating right wing orthodox Monica Lewinsky-style sluts.
thanks for the rape info. i had wondered why it had been put forward as such.
so we have asange night ? (guy fawks lol)
thanks for the rape info. i had wondered why it had been put forward as such.
so we have asange night ? (guy fawks lol)
Of course he is a political prisoner. From what I also read elsewhere, he is wanted because 2 young ladies admitted to having a physical contact with him either without a "mechanical contraceptive" or that the said piece of latex broke during the act. Both women are concerned about STDs and want him to get tested. Neither wants (or at least wanted in August) to press charges. Why they themselves cannot give a 25 mL sample of blood is beyond me.
On the other hand though, lawyers in Sweden joke that "you need to have a signed agreement" before one enters into a physical relationship, otherwise near anything can be construed as "rape". Let's say, a girl says to a guy: "I just broke up with my cheating SOB BF, wanna have a one-nighter?" - that can be construed as "rape" in Sweden, "on rounds of using the emotional stress of the other party". "Someone" used a hook of that sort to try to get him a trial, which is still a roll of the dice, even on fake charges. The fact that he was denied bail proves that he is wanted by someone else, and seems like the good ol' Uncle Sam wants him put out of sight and off the net.