Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
I made a post earlier that you might or might not have caught, about the US lawmakers trying to get the law changed there to make it easier to get their hands on Assange.
Assange to face extradition
- Thread starter teqniq
- Start date
I made a post earlier that you might or might not have caught, about the US lawmakers trying to get the law changed there to make it easier to get their hands on Assange.
JimW
支那暗杀团
Still fits with the less-than-Seal 6 approach then, IMO, if they have to go to the bother of changing a law.
If WikiLeaks is a 'not for profit organisation' where is all the money going?
It's just a website isn't it? Am I missing something?
It's just a website isn't it? Am I missing something?
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
The question isn't whether they'll be sending a SEAL team. The question is, is the US interested in getting their hands on him?
The answer is 'yes'.
The more I look at the website, the less I can see any revealing leaks. It's just regurgitated news presented as stuff we didn't already know.
Fuck knows why John Pilger is adding his support. It's rubbished him for me now. I found his Mother's comments in yesterday's Guardian most revealing. It sort of read like 'it isn't my fault'!
Fuck knows why John Pilger is adding his support. It's rubbished him for me now. I found his Mother's comments in yesterday's Guardian most revealing. It sort of read like 'it isn't my fault'!
No they're fucking not.
What are they going to do with him? Give him a 20 minute slot on Fox news to further boost his income?
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
And I've made it clear that they are 'interested' in getting their hands on him - but that there are pitfalls to both that happening and what would happen in a court if they did. You don't seem to want to consider that.
A court for what?
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Judge Judy?
JimW
支那暗杀团
Don't think that is the question. No doubt various elements within the US state want him - do they dominate and direct policy to the extent that they fabricated these allegations of sexual assault and are manipulating the legal process such that it's all a smokescreen to get him? If you argued they'd tried to influence how the Swedish state handles it I might believe you, but I've seen nothing that undermines what I think is basically the case - Assange behaved in a way that led two women to go to the police about him and that's what's behind the process.
This is very old news now. It was when Wikileaks got their one 'good' break. All of their publicity stemmed from this. Nothing happend.
Personally, I think the current Assange saga has fuck all to do with international politics. When I read Wikileaks I can't see anything worth reading that hasn't already been reported elsewhere in mainstream media. In fact, the most obvious thing I can see is the 'give us your money' option.
Money for what? Most of it is unverified information from years ago. The archive seems to be the biggest selling point. Old news.
So, at the height of internet subverse some bod in the Permanent Select Committe went on radio and Wikileaks picked up on this. That was a long time ago.
The guy is a self-publicist coining it out of war.
I would even go further, and say that his antics today are actually the biggest distraction from the truth. Wikileaks publishing of nothing of real interest is on a par with Fox news. Perhaps he wants to join them?
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
If the US has a hand in this, either influencing Sweden, or the UK or whomever, it's not something that they'd undertake within the view of the public eye.
JimW
支那暗杀团
Even conceding they are doing that (which we don't know), do you think the charges are fabricated? I would be enormously surprised if that was the case. If they're not, Assange should still go and answer them. The only increased risk he would be under by doing that is of conviction for the alleged offences. Any threat from the US would still exist if he flees the charges and goes somewhere else.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
To my understanding, he isn't yet charged.
Do I think the alleged activity took place? At the moment, the only people who know for sure are Assange, and the complainants. For the rest of us, all we can do is conjecture. I accept that it could have happened exactly as they allege. I also accept that something different might have happened.
I agree with the comments of the women in the Guardian article. Both the complainants and the alleged perpetrator deserve justice. And the fight to see proper recognition brought to the efforts to expose violence against women, is a paramount one.
My personal preference would be to see Assange face and deal with the accusations. But given the tremendous political overlay, I think that leeway should be exercised, such as having the Swedish questioning take place somewhere where Assange doesn't face the risk of unintended consequences, like extradition to the US.
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
In that case he should go to Sweden. Staying in the UK or going back to his native Australia would ensure he's whipped off to the US, if the US decides to go for him. In South America, if the US wanted to, he'd be dead within minutes.
But, in spite of the list or right wing hot air nutjobs you posted, all Assange has done is publish information stolen by others. Something Greg Palast has been doing for decades without ever being locked up by the US. A man who incidentaly has this to say about Assange:
"Do you remember the reporter who put his by-line on the Pentagon Papers story? Of course not, he didn't risk a thing. Julian Assange didn't risk a thing either - except excess TV exposure and an excess of blonde groupies. The hero of the Wikileaks/Guardian/Times/Spiegel exposure is Pvt. Bradley Manning.
"NO ONE gives a sh*t about this heroic man who is rotting in Obama's prison cell. Not Assange (who did nothing to protect him, and does nothing now), nor the Left happy to use his information nor the New York Times which is happy to take the bows for material Manning risked his freedom for.
"Assange is like all publishers except that he erases the names of the 'author' from the books. He will join his fellows in that ring of Hell devoted to those who wear the mantle of courage stolen from others.
"I salute Pvt. Manning. It is Manning, not Assange, who will save this world."
http://www.gregpalast.com/the-real-wiki-hero/
But, in spite of the list or right wing hot air nutjobs you posted, all Assange has done is publish information stolen by others. Something Greg Palast has been doing for decades without ever being locked up by the US. A man who incidentaly has this to say about Assange:
"Do you remember the reporter who put his by-line on the Pentagon Papers story? Of course not, he didn't risk a thing. Julian Assange didn't risk a thing either - except excess TV exposure and an excess of blonde groupies. The hero of the Wikileaks/Guardian/Times/Spiegel exposure is Pvt. Bradley Manning.
"NO ONE gives a sh*t about this heroic man who is rotting in Obama's prison cell. Not Assange (who did nothing to protect him, and does nothing now), nor the Left happy to use his information nor the New York Times which is happy to take the bows for material Manning risked his freedom for.
"Assange is like all publishers except that he erases the names of the 'author' from the books. He will join his fellows in that ring of Hell devoted to those who wear the mantle of courage stolen from others.
"I salute Pvt. Manning. It is Manning, not Assange, who will save this world."
http://www.gregpalast.com/the-real-wiki-hero/
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
we all remember tora bora. What similar attempts have the us made to secure assange?
newbie
undisambiguated
Manning needed help to save the world.
What would have happened if Manning had taken his disk direct to the NYT or the Guardian? I'm doubtful they'd have published- possibly the footage of the journalists being shot would have aired- but not the main trove.
Instead, and in the spririt of the age, he found an internet startup with an slim but tantalising backstory and handed them a prize bigger than anyone would have ever imagined. Taking Assange and his mates at face value (ie not considering that they were set up by spook central), there's no way they sat in their bedrooms dreaming that one day someone would turn up with some years of the entire US diplomatic cable traffic. That's just silly... sure they'd hope for important stories about obscure players like Trafigura, but there's no way they'd anticipate a treasure trove like Manning provided.
So everyone is out of their depth. But to pretend that a foreigner meddling in US affairs at that level "didn't risk a thing", as Palast does, is silly. The Pentagon Papers were published in the US under constitutional free speech by an established, respected and protected newspaper. They also, crucually, were a componernt in the main internal US political dynamic of the time. The cables came via a wildcard foreign website immune from US establishment pressure and seem to have united domestic US opinion that they harmed US interests, while actually providing little in the way of smoking guns.
Palast seems to be missing something in his determination to push Assange into a "circle of hell".
What would have happened if Manning had taken his disk direct to the NYT or the Guardian? I'm doubtful they'd have published- possibly the footage of the journalists being shot would have aired- but not the main trove.
Instead, and in the spririt of the age, he found an internet startup with an slim but tantalising backstory and handed them a prize bigger than anyone would have ever imagined. Taking Assange and his mates at face value (ie not considering that they were set up by spook central), there's no way they sat in their bedrooms dreaming that one day someone would turn up with some years of the entire US diplomatic cable traffic. That's just silly... sure they'd hope for important stories about obscure players like Trafigura, but there's no way they'd anticipate a treasure trove like Manning provided.
So everyone is out of their depth. But to pretend that a foreigner meddling in US affairs at that level "didn't risk a thing", as Palast does, is silly. The Pentagon Papers were published in the US under constitutional free speech by an established, respected and protected newspaper. They also, crucually, were a componernt in the main internal US political dynamic of the time. The cables came via a wildcard foreign website immune from US establishment pressure and seem to have united domestic US opinion that they harmed US interests, while actually providing little in the way of smoking guns.
Palast seems to be missing something in his determination to push Assange into a "circle of hell".
Meltingpot
Living in our pools we soon forget about the sea
I have a lot of time for Greg Palast but I disagree with what he says about "no one giving a sh*t" about Bradley Manning - his name comes up a lot on threads I've been browsing recently where Assange has been discussed.
free spirit
more tea vicar?
As I understand it, the case was initially dropped, and then restarted.
Having read the transcripts of the interviews, seeing as someone leaked them to the web, I can well see why the case was initially dropped, because it stands very little chance of getting a conviction whatever the truth of the matter - I'd expect it would also have been dropped in the UK by the CPS (rightly or wrongly).
It's a lot less clear why it was then picked up by a different prosecutor and restarted again. It's this part of the process that smacks of some pulling of strings behind the scenes.
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Do people really think those transcripts alone are the whole of the case?
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
I don't, I don't see how they can be.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
A lot of people probably do
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
There may be an assumption that leaked documents = all documents onward leaked, or even that leaked documents were all the documents that there were to leak.
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Forgive the derail but the Guardian piece on 'those who know assange' had a comment by 'joepestron' on the first page, now deleted. It said something along the line that there is also a UK female weapons inspector holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy (no name). It had a breathless conspiraloon feel to it and was swiftly removed, but has anyone heard similar?*
* Hangs head in shame for furthering conspiraloonery.
* Hangs head in shame for furthering conspiraloonery.
Deareg
Well-Known Member
Are you seriously saying that the vice president of the US is not capable of fielding a loaded question?
JimW
支那暗杀团
I'm sure he is. Do you reckon that clip is tantamount to a bald statement of govt policy that Assange is a terrorist? I don't.
Forgive the derail but the Guardian piece on 'those who know assange' had a comment by 'joepestron' on the first page, now deleted. It said something along the line that there is also a UK female weapons inspector holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy (no name). It had a breathless conspiraloon feel to it and was swiftly removed, but has anyone heard similar?*
* Hangs head in shame for furthering conspiraloonery.
On Thursday or Friday someone posted a name here or on the other thread; I looked it up and found only conspiraloon sources... one blog pushing it in particular.
But I can't remember the name of the blog or of the alleged person.
Similar threads
