Assange to face extradition

[danny la rouge]

OK. The irony of saying that on a message board, though...

Not in the least ironic. Bulletin boards are a minority sport.

(If you really want a discussion on what effect new media are having on democratising the traditional media, then we're going to need a new thread).

 

[teqniq]

New evidence of US operation against Julian Assange

The above is doing the rounds on Twitter.

It's tone is (unsurpisingly) staunchly in defence of Assange.

It does make some interesting allegations supported by what it describes as wide inter-agency co-operation in the States in pursuance of all things and people associated with Wikileaks.

I await the usual dissection.

 

[danny la rouge]

New evidence of US operation against Julian Assange

The above is doing the rounds on Twitter.

It's tone is (unsurpisingly) staunchly in defence of Assange.

It does make some interesting allegations supported by what it describes as wide inter-agency co-operation in the States in pursuance of all things and people associated with Wikileaks.

I await the usual dissection.

Look at the first line of the second paragraph: "dubious sexual assault allegations". So, no prejudging going on there. Second sentence of that paragraph: " He has good reason to fear that if he is extradited to Sweden, Washington will intervene, extraditing him to face a trial on espionage charges." So they're already setting up this idea that his fears of extradition to the US trump the need to test the allegations through due legal process. The allegations are already dubious. We don't even need to worry about justice being done or being seen to be done there.

 

[teqniq]

Lol well yes, I did notice that too. I am trying to sit on the fence on this one but to reiterate whilst I believe that Assange is a bit of an attention-seeking twat, I imagine the U.S. government would love to close the whole Wikileaks operation down and bring people involved to stand trial within it's own jurisdiction.

I guess we won't really know one way or another whether or not the fears being touted around that he risks extradition to the States if he goes to Sweden to answer some questions are paranoid witterings or have some basis in reality unless he actually goes.

 

[butchersapron]

New evidence of US operation against Julian Assange

The above is doing the rounds on Twitter.

It's tone is (unsurpisingly) staunchly in defence of Assange.

It does make some interesting allegations supported by what it describes as wide inter-agency co-operation in the States in pursuance of all things and people associated with Wikileaks.

I await the usual dissection.

Not a thing there to dissect. It simply says that wikileaks say the US is preparing and collecting material about wikileaks with a view to further legal action. Exactly as wikileaks would have known would happen beforehand. That's it. Nothing to do with this case at all.

 

[butchersapron]

Lol well yes, I did notice that too. I am trying to sit on the fence on this one but to reiterate whilst I believe that Assange is a bit of an attention-seeking twat, I imagine the U.S. government would love to close the whole Wikileaks operation down and bring people involved to stand trial within it's own jurisdiction.

I guess we won't really know one way or another whether or not the fears being touted around that he risks extradition to the States if he goes to Sweden to answer some questions are paranoid witterings or have some basis in reality unless he actually goes.

He risks extradition wherever he goes/stays now - it's just that in one place in particular he faces other allegations.

 

[smmudge]

Yeah WSWS are so unashamedly in support of Assange, 'too' much I think because they shouldn't be questioning the allegations.

But cutting through the bullshit this part seems to be the "new evidence"

Recent prosecution testimony indicates that the case against Manning is only a small element in a massive FBI investigation. US Army Major Ashden Fein, the lead prosecution counsel, told hearings this month that the FBI file on the case, most of it classified, totalled 42,135 pages or 3,475 documents. “Manning is a piece of the FBI file,” Fein said, and only accounted for “8,741 pages or 636 different documents.”

US Army Computer Crime Investigative Unit special agent Mark Mander also told the pre-trial hearings that the FBI was targeting seven civilians, including “the founders, owners or managers of WikiLeaks,” for criminal activity and espionage. He said a US military investigation into WikiLeaks began in early June 2010, a few days after Manning was arrested.

I went and looked up Alexa O'Brien. She is a journalist and editor/writer for WL Central so not totally unbiased (WL Central write about Wikileaks but are not officially associated with them). But she does seem to be covering the Manning case in great detail. One of the articles that I'm guessing WSWS.org are citing (there must be another one too but I can't see it straight off) is here.

(And if you're interested the rest of her archives are here)

 

[danny la rouge]

"He said a US military investigation into WikiLeaks began in early June 2010, a few days after Manning was arrested"

If that's news to them, then they are in trouble.

 

[butchersapron]

If that's news to them, then they are in trouble.

And that this is "broader' than the Manning case."!

 

[danny la rouge]

And that this is "broader' than the Manning case."!

Indeed.

 

[smmudge]

He risks extradition wherever he goes/stays now - it's just that in one place in particular he faces other allegations.

Do you think that there's a chance the US will look to prosecute him at some point in the future? Not from Sweden or anywhere in particular, just wherever they may be able to get him?

 

[butchersapron]

Well he is going to Sweden and if they do decide to take that route - as i expect they probably will - it will be have to be from there. Going to Sweden or staying the UK doesn't effect that one way or another.

 

[smmudge]

Yeah. Not having a go but genuinely interested in what has made you change your mind in the last six months? Funny thing is I'm not even sure that the US will look to extradite him, as surely it would be a PR disaster. Lots of evidence suggests they want to prosecute him for something, but whether they actually would...For all the talk of Assange being an 'attention seeking twat', it's his high profile that might save his skin in terms of a US prosecution, IMO. But then again, a high profile prosecution would deter other people from doing similar.

 

[butchersapron]

I'm not sure i have really - i think i made one post/argument that the US might decide not to extradite him for a few reasons whilst believing those same reasons (no real damage done, projection of symbolic power etc) might also lead to them deciding to prosecute him. I think Assange's actions over the last 6 months have now made a prosecution far more likely - they are now less likely to leave it as he will now be seen as having been taking the piss publicly.

 

[elbows]

Likewise my suggestion on the other thread that they might not bother should not imply that I will be surprised if they do.

 

[temper_tantrum]

Assange statement 'on the embassy steps' at 4pm apparently.

 

[Jon-of-arc]

Assange statement 'on the embassy steps' at 4pm apparently.

Any news on this? Googling news from my phone is too much hassle.

 

[butchersapron]

4pm Ecuadorean time.

 

[Citizen66]

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange will ignore a Metropolitan Police order to surrender himself at a police station, his representative has said.

Susan Benn said he was advised to "decline to comply" and will remain inside the Ecuadorian embassy while his application for asylum is processed.
Officers from the Met's extradition unit delivered a note to Mr Assange at the London embassy on Thursday.
He wants to avoid being sent to Sweden to face rape and assault accusations.
The police letter required that the 40-year-old surrender himself to Belgravia police station at 11:30 BST on Friday.
Under international diplomatic arrangements, the police cannot go into the embassy to arrest Mr Assange.
In a statement read out on his behalf by Ms Benn, Mr Assange said: "This should not be considered any sign of disrespect. Under both international and domestic UK law asylum assessments take priority over extradition claims.

"The issues faced by Mr Assange are serious. His life and liberty and the life and liberty of his organisation and those associated with it are at stake," said Ms Benn, a committee member of Mr Assange's defence fund.
The Wikileaks website published a mass of leaked diplomatic cables that embarrassed several governments and international businesses.
Mr Assange fears that if he is sent to Sweden he could be sent on to the United States to face charges over Wikileaks and that there, he could face the death penalty.
Ms Benn said: "Mr Assange did not feel safe from US extradition in the UK. We are all too aware of the abuses of the US-UK extradition treaty. Although Mr Assange has been trapped in the UK under dangerous circumstances, he has at least had the freedom to apply for political asylum.
"It is in this context that Julian has made the difficult decision to seek refuge inside the Equadorean embassy to ask for asylum. Julian will remain in the embassy under the protection of the Equadoran government while evidence for his application is being assembled and processed."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18648922

 

[maldwyn]

will they use a honey trap to grab him.

 

[butchersapron]

Anyone know which Susan Benn this is?

 

[elbows]

So pretty much the same as what he said yesterday then.

Oh and this yesterday:

When asked if he had anything to say to the women who have accused him of rape and indecency, he replied: "I am simply not charged. That's all. That's all that is important in this matter. What has been said to date is sufficient."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jun/29/julian-assange-police-surrender-bail


Grrrr, although to be completely fair I don't think its good journalism to say that the women accused him of rape, I seem to recall they didn't put it like that and were initially trying to find out whether he could be forced to have a HIV test.

 

[elbows]

Anyone know which Susan Benn this is?

I strongly suspect its this one, and the BBC have apparently made asses of themselves by describing her as a lawyer earlier:

http://www.pallabs.org/about/who_pal_is/pal_team

 

[butchersapron]

I strongly suspect its this one, and the BBC have made asses of themselves by describing her as a lawyer:

http://www.pallabs.org/about/who_pal_is/pal_team

Yes, that was who i settled on - need proper confirmation of course.

 

[Jon-of-arc]

Just curious, amidst all this crazyness, where people stand on wikileaks. Thats as in the organisation, seperate from Assange (as far as is possible..).

My understanding is that, prior toAssange coming to prominence (which happened around the same time as the cables and the aftermath of the alledged assaults), they were well respected in journalistic circles. They leaked some.important stuff, and won some prestigious awards.

It was when the cult of Assange happened, when he started using wikileaks (& wikileaks began allowing itself to be used...) as a propaganda tool in his defence, that it seemed to lose its way.

If he had done the right thing and distanced himself whilst he had serious allegations hanging over his head, I think it could have remaimed a important, relavant news org.

 

[elbows]

He fell out with loads of people in the media before then, and we'd been bitching about his ego and the way wikileaks was managed before then too.

His dubious attitude towards information control, the possibilities of using the information given to wikileaks to make a lot of money, were the things that first got me hopping mad.

Think information brokerage, and pay to have stuff not released for a starters.

 

[butchersapron]

wikileaks as money-making model is what you need to look at. A s news org? They were never that. It's the model of selling restricted info for private profit as openness and democracy and progressive that counts.

 

[Jon-of-arc]

Interesting.

I dont remember many early objections to wikileaks on here. Not doubting it, but links would be appreciated.

I also dont recall much anti assange press, prior to the cables/assault, either. The articles I remember described him as secretive, elusive, shy and an oddball.

 

[butchersapron]

Interesting.

I dont remember many early objections to wikileaks on here. Not doubting it, but links would be appreciated.

I also dont recall much anti assange press, prior to the cables/assault, either. The articles I remember described him as secretive, elusive, shy and an oddball.

Why would they be appreciated? To point out that people were wrong? Or to highlight that as it evolved the real motivation became clearer?

if stuff isn't know then you can't blame people for not mentioning it.

 

[elbows]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/m...e-guardian-fell-out-with-assange-2179166.html

January 2011:

One afternoon last November, the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange collected his lawyer and entered the office of Alan Rusbridger, editor of The Guardian newspaper.
He had every reason to be pleased: within days the name of his website would be spewing from every media outlet and his reputation as the world's leading "freedom of information warrior" would be confirmed.
But the visit was not a happy one. Assange had come to threaten the newspaper with legal action if it went ahead with plans to run stories based on the vast quantity of US government material leaked to his website.
The relationship between Assange and the newspaper had by this point descended into one that involved "distrust and anger", becoming so acrimonious that the WikiLeaks founder claimed it had breached an agreement on the publication of the data which he saw as his own.
In a detailed account of the tensions, Vanity Fair magazine reports that Assange argued that "he owned the information and had a financial interest in how and when it was released".