I hate to say this but ...
i wonder if all the court documents about the case will be posted onto wikileaks?
Wikileaks spokesman Julian Assange has been arrested by police in London and will appear in court later today. A spokesman for Scotland Yard said: "Assange was arrested by appointment at a central London police station at 9.30 this morning. "He will appear at City of Westminster magistrates later today." Thirty-nine-year old …
"The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth becomes the greatest enemy of the State." -- Dr. Joseph M. Goebbels
are not publishing the details of the alleged charges. Who's gagging you?
The so-called rape charge is a charge of consensual sex with a broken condom. Both women were texting and tweeting boasts about their conquests, until they found out they'd both slept with the same guy and went to the police together, having already "aligned" their stories.
A clearer example of a fit-up I have yet to see, so I ask again "Who's gagging you?"
I have to be quick telling you this so please excuse tht typos but there is a man in sunglasses and a suit standing in the corner of the offce, he's been here all daay and I think he may have a gun.
But i'm sureit's not related to this or anything.
I can't stare at him for too long, obviously.
Commentards please note - we're moderating heavily on this, because we are part of a larger conspiracy, so please don't whine if you get rejected. Much obliged.
I'm going to make tea for the mysterious man now, he's been standing there for several hours with no lunch or anything and there's no harm in being nice, is there?
Ok, this is AlterNet, but bear with me...
Assange's London attorney, Mark Stephens, told AOL News today that Swedish prosecutors told him that 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. "Whatever 'sex by surprise' is, it's only a offense in Sweden -- not in the U.K. or the U.S. or even Ibiza," Stephens said. "I feel as if I'm in a surreal Swedish movie being threatened by bizarre trolls. The prosecutor has not asked to see Julian, never asked to interview him, and he hasn't been charged with anything. He's been told he's wanted for questioning, but he doesn't know the nature of the allegations against him."
Oh yes. I rejected those because you said things that could be libellous or at least dodgy that we don't want on the site, and I didn't want any of us to lose our jobs. We're being fairly cautious, possibly over-cautious, but that's why. We don't want to be in a world of shit at all because of the blurtings of any of our commentards.
The comments were 'similar' to the extent that they were on the same subject. So... yeah. But you can just chalk it up to general conspiracy if you prefer. It's a pretty good catch-all.
And now if you'll excuse me I have another 100 possible legal bombs, carelessly flung by you lot, to carefully sift through.
This is best resolved in a fair and balanced court of law.
The problem is, how do you (a) try him with the current media storm, (b) show that the trial is fair and balanced?
I'm not one for conspiracies, but if this is a smear campaign (i.e., the claims are insubstantial and get retracted before real proof is needed), it's a hideous abuse of multiple justice systems.
when we're no longer sure that Sweden can be trusted in this case.
WikiLeaks has caused huge embarrassment for the Swedes, the leaked cables show that their policy of being a neutral player in the Baltic is no such thing. The current Swedish government have got plenty of interest in seeing this prosecuted with extreme prejudice.
This from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10774473
...a leaked document, purportedly by the US army counterintelligence centre, looks into the threat posed by Wikileaks to national security - and how to marginalise it.
"The identification, exposure, termination of employment, criminal prosecution, legal action against current or former insiders, leakers, or whistle-blowers could potentially damage or destroy [the website's] center of gravity and deter others considering similar actions from using the Wikileaks.org Web site," the document reads.
Interesting how they started a smear campaign before he was even on the radar of the state... He was on US radar, sure, for the previous leak, which contained little or no classified data and was not technically a crime.
Interesting also how one would not assume that paying a member of a government to provide classified documents from a secure server would not be seen as illegal and have multiple world governments immediately demanding his arrest.
Even more interesting how it is Sweeden issuing the arrest warrant, and he has yet to be issued the same in the USA or the whole of Europe.
The Metropolitan Police said: "He is accused by the Swedish authorities of one count of unlawful coercion, two counts of sexual molestation and one count of rape, all alleged to have been committed in August 2010."
-- I thought they merely wanted to interview him in connection with the alleged offences, he wasn't actually accused of anything at this stage? Is this the Swedes changing their minds, or is it just the Met spinning it into something more serious than it actually is.
Of course, the whole thing stinks to high heaven....
Can anyone explain exactly what he is accused of?
As I understand it, both women admit it was consensual sex. So how does that become one count of rape, one of unlawful coercion and two counts of sexual molestation?
This whole thing stinks
I just wish I were rich enough that me boycotting Amazon, Pay Pal etc would make the slightest difference to them
There's something in the details; from Wikipedia page for Assange (yes, I'm aware that Wikipedia isn't always 100% accurate):
"He is wanted for questioning on suspicion of "sex crimes"; it is reported that while having consensual sex his condom broke and he either did not disclose the breakage to his partner or continued after his partner asked him to stop"
If that's the case, it's not "rape" in the traditional sense of the word, but from what little I understand, it counts as rape under Swedish law.
Of course, the whole lot of it smacks of government interference, particularly the Swiss bank account being closed yesterday; I'm sure there's 100s of accounts in Switzerland with dubious addresses being used, why was his picked on?
"Of course, the whole lot of it smacks of government interference, particularly the Swiss bank account being closed yesterday; I'm sure there's 100s of accounts in Switzerland with dubious addresses being used, why was his picked on?"
I'm not sure that it's necessarily government interference. I think he's done enough to antagonise Swiss banks that they would want to do this themselves.
Swedish law makes the definition of rape very broad. AFAIK, Assange is accused of having sex without a condom = rape in Sweden.
I'm not sure that this is bad for Assange though. Whereas the UK is a member of NATO and a staunch ally of the USA, Sweden is a neutral country. Furthermore, unlike the UK, Sweden does not have a fast track extradition treaty with the USA, where many are quite vocal about what should happen to Assange.
Sweden is not that neutral in practice. We are not a member of NATO, but participate in numerous NATO drills. Ever since Sweden agreed to stop it's research into developing nuclear weapons in the beginning of the sixties (I'm not joking) they have informally been under the US of A's nuclear umbrella.
I don’t mind that Sweden cooperates with they yanks. I’m opposed to the fact that when it’s discovered nobody stands up and takes the blame.
In the case of the American embassies’ monitoring of Swedish (and every other country they operate in I would expect) citizens, the decision to withhold information from the parliament and in the end the public was not taken by a minister but someone with a much lower rank, who can not be held responsible. Fantastic!
Sweden, neutral? Don’t think so. Maybe during WWII… no wait, half of us were Nazis back then… and let “tze Germans” pass through our country back and forth to Norway just to avoid being taken by force.
Back in August the swedish authorities dropped the warrant due to lack of evidence:
They are also saying that although the sex started as consensual it did not end tha way:
'According to media reports, Assange slept with two women during a visit to Sweden in August. One of them has been quoted by a Swedish newspaper as saying that the sex was consensual for a start, but ended with abuse.
In an interview with Aftonbladet, one of the women dismissed claims that the allegations had been orchestrated by the Pentagon.'
We shall see where this all goes, i dont want to prejudge the ruling but even if it was any Joe of the street it would be an odd case. It just so happens that the most powerfull and influential government in the world wants custody of this man at the same time, it does complicate ones view.
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by a moderator
From what I can make out, Assange has already put a lot of the information out there in encrypted format and will simply release the keys when necessary. This protects against them downing his websites etc. The files are already out there and distributed widely, so any attempt to get them back is doomed to failure. The only thing they could try to do is prevent him saying anything!! He could shout the passwords in court!!
It all sounds like standards smear tactics, but all looks rather odd to me. Has anyone considered how Assange can get sensitive information like this from what would normally be many sources? Are there really that many people willing to send this information to him despite penalties of life in prison etc.? Not just one person, but many? Whilst the governments might be crying out about this, I'm not so sure they're not leaking it themselves.
The guy who did the copying was known, very quick, and was arrested. Assange recruited and PAID him.
This was low clearance data. Though classified, it might have only taken public trust or basic security clearance to have access to the servers this stuff was on. He was an analyst, responsible for review of such data, and thus had access to all of it. This was a single data set, not multiple disparate systems.
Desperate people do desperate things. Some people (many screaming about this data), would believe it should have been released anyway, and may be easier to convince to steal it.
A data analyst who is not an IT analyst may not have even understood that copying this data to a thumb drive would have been logged and would be very easy to trace. Preventing access is tough, especially from people who's job it is to HAVE access, but logging access is easily done and easily reviewed, if not proactively. He probably had no idea it would be so easy to catch him.
"Has anyone considered how Assange can get sensitive information like this from what would normally be many sources? Are there really that many people willing to send this information to him despite penalties of life in prison etc.? Not just one person, but many"
Of course ther are many sources. There are also many other documents leaked via WikiLeaks over the last years, this is just the highest profile case.
Of course the goverments (employees) are leaking the information. Assange is not the source of the information. Assange does not "get sensitive information like this". Wikileaks is an organisation, Assange is just a founder. Whistleblowers send the documents to Wikileaks. Wikileaks has many volunteers, their job is to vet the information, decide what to publish and to protect the whistleblowers.
I'm no legal expert, and maybe one can correct me if I'm wrong, but the hearing today is in realtion to an extradiation request, not the crimes themselves.
In the cases you mention, "serial rapists, mass murders etc" the authorituies need time to collate evidence for and a against i.e make sure they have enough information to put the person in prison (similarly the defence needs time to prove innocence if applicable).
I the case of Mr Assange, they simply need to determine that he is the man that the extradition is for (he handed himself in so we can assume that is covered) and that he will be given a fair trial if he is handed over.
Again, I'm no legal expert, but this is why I believe the case can be heard so quickly.
It depends on the jurisdiction, level of the court involved, and time sensitive nature of the case as it may be.
Arraignments typically happen within days, if not hours, even for minor crimes. Grand jury hearings also tend to happen pretty quickly. most large cases take years to get in court not because of court availability, but because of legal maneuvering of legal teams, motions for requests to delay, time required to process physical evidence, and more.
There have been news reports here of people being tried for major crimes, recently, within days of being arrested. A woman who drove her car purposefully of a bridge with her 2 kids in the back seat, let them drown, and then pretended it was an accident and called police, she was in court within a week. Same for several recent shootings. Full trials might take a year or more to schedule and conclude, followed by appeals, but they were in court quickly, and those who plead guilty were sentenced pretty quick as well.
Assange is not fighting this. It shuold be quick to extradite, and reasonably quick to prosecute.
Indeed, you are correct. I would assume this is under the European Arrest Warrant which does not have a very high standard of evidence required in order for it to be enacted. Indeed, pretty well no evidence at all, on the basis that all the relevant countries are covered by the ECHR. I believe you can only be extradited on a charge which can be matched to an illegal activity in the UK. So you can't be extradited to Austria for holocaust denial which is an offence there. However, even if the detailed interpretation of what Julian Assange did, or did not, get up to in Sweden wouldn't result in a guilty verdict in the UK, there's plenty of fudge space. The Swedes do not have to provide any prima facie evidence of any crime (which you would for extradition to most of the World).
The arrest is for questioning at this stage and is going to be interesting due to the somewhat arcane and intricate area of Swedish sexual politics.
This post has been deleted by a moderator
We got out man, the mole who sold the data. Assange is wanted, but of the countries damaged by these leaks, there's not as much egg on the face of the USA as there are others. We're OK letting them have their way with him so long as it follows due process and is open to the public. The costs to extradite him and try him here for a crime he committed while overseas, it's not worth it.
These were not national secrets, weapon designs, building blueprints, these were recorded cables; personal conversations between diplomats, over lines they KNEW would be recorded, that by law would have been declassified eventually anyway, and some of which would have already been subject to FoIA requests (though they might have been heavily redacted if so). Its an embarrassment of what some people discussed over monitored lines, but there does not appear to be any illegal activity here at all, just insights into how governments work behind closed doors. These are the things we all know get discussed, but we don;t care to know the details of. Politics has been done this way for thousands of years.
That the ladies wanted him to use a condom, and he didn't.
Still - I'm sure the truth will come out, I just wonder whether it will be the Swedish, UK or USA version of the truth, the ladies, Assanges or the 'real' truth.
If he is guilty then he should be punished accordingly, but if he is found innocent then I hope that he can claim compensation.
@The dog ate it
He was brought in for questioning in Sweden immediately after the charges were filed, and they were dismissed. Then, recently, when he was in the UK, they said the charges required more questioning. Regardless of how suspicious this is, he repeatedly approached the Swedish authorities, stating his willingness to discuss this via videolink, or at the Swedish embassy in London. They have made no response to these offers — until they issued a warrant for his arrest.
In the US you're accused, but they have to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That said, little more than a grand jury or a simple hearing, at which no evidence is presented, can remand you to jail for years awaiting a trial. (if later proven not-guilty, you do have some recourse). In other countries, you are guilty until you can prove your innocence. In others, you are simply accused, but you actually have to be absolved of guilt, not proven beyond reason guilty. These are gray areas.
...because real women like to have sex with a guy who says he'll protect them from possible diseases and unwanted pregancy and then doesn't, because that would give him some moments of discomfort. Their own distress and worry, or even simple pissed-off-ness, weighs as nothing against his convenience. Whereas radical feminists insist that the rules not be changed half-way through the game.
New job opportunity just opened.
URGENT: looking for someone with extensive Adobe Photoshop skills (knowledge of magnetic lasso, cutting, pasting and layers required). Very generous salary. If interested, fill in the application and mail it to: 10 Downing Street, London, SW1A 2AA
his lawyer has been playing this one rather well so far. It's been widely reported that he's kept the plod informed of his whereabouts, words like 'in hiding' have been quickly scotched. The lawyer even managed to get the words 'by appointment' in the middle of the sentence which was bright. If that vital part appeared on the beginning or end of the statement the Daily Fails of the world would just crop that part out of their quotes.
I make no judgement on the blokes guilt or otherwise. It just strikes me he's playing this one with a very straight bat*.
*With apologies to any Aussies in the audience for bringing in a cricket metaphor on such a painful day.
Richard Tomlinson, MI6 defector was harassed in various countries with smears of sexual deviancy.
Read "The Big Breach", it was distributed freely by 192.com and it's easy to find those old copies.
This whole thing stinks of the very impropriety and corruption that wikileaks exposes.
I don't like the guy personally but the fact that he faced the charges already, they were dropped by the prosecutor and then re-opened after the new leaks is too obvious. He's played it well so far by co-operating but I suspect he's going down for this one, the US is pretty pissed.
We can all assume things and make up our minds before any hearing, are we all experts now, from hearsay and spin wafting around in the ether? We can all say it stinks from the comfort of our armchairs but truth is, only Assange and those 2 girls know what went on. Allegations have been made and it's up to him to answer them. To assume makes an ass of you and me! Can't we all wait and see, trust the courts appointed by a government voted in by the public?
If he is found guilty he should serve his time like anyone else. If not he will be cleared to carry on releasing uninteresting national sectets for ever more.
Even though some people act as if they're part of some elite club who are the only ones blessed with insight or free from state mind control, I think pretty much everyone, on hearing about the allegations, would have immediately recognised the *potential convenience* of them for someone wanting to discredit Assange.
However, it's not remotely rational to conclude that that the allegations *must* be false simply because they're convenient.
There are some people who seem to think that being the first to jump to a conclusion must mean they're smarter than everyone else, rather then just less cautious, even though it's pretty obvious that it doesn't actually take any mental effort or skill to upgrade a suspicion to a certainty.
The question is now if he is granted bail pending any appeal he may make against extradition what bail conditions will be imposed by the Court.
For example one condition could be that he does not use the internet whilst on bail.
Another could be no more leaks.
He could even be tagged.
'm surprised he let his trousers down with such an obvious lack of judgement whilst leaking !
Assange's lawyer said people were staking out their homes watching them and trying to spy on them, just as you would expect, but the point is, the authorities knew exactly where he was. So all this high profile bullshit Interpol press releases about hunting him in the government friendly corporate media is nothing more than another act for our benefit, all helping to build him up to appear to be this big criminal who has now been caught. One more part of the act. Which just increases its likelihood of being a good old fashioned honey trap being used to discredit and undermine him. Not the first time that method has been used to discredit someone.
They have of course already decided he is guilty, its just trying to find any way to make that stick, but you can bet the best lawyers in the world have been hired to find any way to bring him down.
So now its time for the corporate media to show the government two minute hate again. :( … after all the majority of the corporate media have to show it or the government will cut off their access to future news events, which puts them at a commercial disadvantage, so the journalists working for these corporations are silenced and have to follow the company line, otherwise it will risk hurting the company profits.
But then this is one more chess move that sadly was inevitable. It won't however stop us seeing what our governments have been doing behind our backs. We now know for sure they are lying bastards, so whatever they do to him that won't change what we think of them. Plus if they take down Wikileaks more will appear. So let battle commence.
Having just (yes I know) read The Steig Larsson Millennium series, which is based around a massive SAPO cover up, the publicly visible parts of the Assange affair bear remarkable similarities to the allegedly fictional Salanader case.
Some conspiracy nuts claim Larsson died of a convenient heart attack because he was getting too close to the truth... with the striking similarities between his trilogy and apparent real life in Assange's case I am not convinced that the nuts are so far from the truth after all...
Just heard from Demotix that they want photographers at the Flash Protest:
Dear London team,
It has been brought to our attention that a flash mob has been organised in protest of today's arrest of wikileaks founder Julian Assange:
flash mob protest in support of Wikileaks & Freedom of Speech TODAY Westminster Magistrates Court 13:30, London, U.K
If you are in the area and are interested in covering this event please remember to stay in touch via our twitter account or email and to upload your images / videos of the flash mob as soon as you can.
It's such a blatant and pathetic witch hunt by various governments around the world that it's not funny.
Few of the secrets reported by the media are anything other than abundantly obvious, although I'll grant that if there was anything that really couldn't be reported by the media they'd have to skirt around the issue..
The question needs to be asked as to what all this focus on Assange is diverting attention from. The strategy of focusing attention on something unworthy of a Europe wide arrest warrant could easily backfire and drive more people to read Wikileaks.
The conclusions have to be :
The security services are diverting attention from something else
or (more likely) the security services don't give a toss and Assange has annoyed a load of non job politicians who lack subtlety, see their ability to lie to the public diminishing and have their fuckwit 'Something Must Be Done' hat on.
...if you're about to blow the lid of the comms between the higher-ups of the world's Governments, you don't go out and bonk the first bit of skirt you see, do you?!
You think, "I dunno, maybe I need to keep my brains in my head not my trousers, in case someone tries to frame me!"
The history of this whole thing suggests the scheme was cobbled together without the aid of the initial prosecutor. After he did the usual routine he pronounced the complaints not credible.
Smart people would have stopped at this point and re-grouped.
But no, we are dealing characters such as find employment with the CIA, best remembered for the Bay of Pigs fiasco, and the U.S. taps a friendly politician who in turns gets a willing prosecutor in a totally different city.
How unrealistic can this get?
P.S. Did you hear of the sick joke that Australia might deny this Australian citizen re-entry if he is convicted? Another bunch of politicians.
If this is the arrogance of our allies and their level of stupidity who needs enemies...
Up the Parthians!!
I wonder if Obama knows his Persian history, if he doesnt I suggest he learns it and fast... because thats who the US will be fighting if they go into Iran and I'd run 8 to 1 on the Persians personally.
On the Assange front - yay - they've done the second stupidest thing they could have done (the most stupid the bit where he has a heart attack in his cell... expect that in about three weeks...)
If the collective governments had any sense (and I know thats an oxymoron) they would have left him alone and ignored him until he died forgotten at the age of 87 in Bruge (and trust me, the highlight of Bruge is dying there). Wailing about the things he's released and chasing him halfway round the globe has done nothing more than make sure that everyone on the planet (to a bored yak herder halfway up kilimanjaro) knows whats going on...
I dont think we've heard even the half of what wikileaks has gotten hold of - the stuff released so far is bait for the trap, which the govts have jumped into with both feet flailing.You know - if I was him - I would have set up a simple payload program - with a time release - so that if the PHB's get a hold of him or more probably if he stabs himself accidentally in pottery class - it waits a certain amount of time and then releases the *really* nasty stuff.
Kudos on the Goebbels quote, very very apt sadly...
Rape Insurance is a wonderful idea - I wonder if they got the suggestion from Discworld by any chance (thieves guild) - Do you get a nice parker pen just for enquiring...?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021