UK Home Office signs order to extradite Julian Assange to US UK Home Secretary Priti Patel today signed an order approving the extradition of Julian Assange to America, where he faces espionage charges for sharing secret government documents. Assange led WikiLeaks, a website that released classified files including footage of US airstrikes and military documents from the Iraq and …
Moral Authority? Priti Patel? <cough, choke>
Home Secretary is a position of Moral Authority. But Priti Patel is only Interested in Authority, not Morality.
In fact, she seems to relish in the suffering of others - especially the Syrians, Ukranians & Iraqi Kurds who have genuine claims of asylum
Making her home secretary was like asking Dr Mengele to run an immigration, detention & policing system.
Assange is charged with assisting an American violate the security of American systems.
Had he been charged with assisting a Brit violate the security of Brit systems, then he should be tried in the UK, but he wasn't.
There's no question that the offense is an offense under both US and UK law....
BUT unlike in the UK, in the US he has some massive advantages, although the chattering classes won't acknowledge it. His biggest advantage is a thing called New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971), which makes it bright-letter law that publishing classified material is not a crime.
So the charge is not related to that, but a conspiracy to hack into systems: the allegation is that Assange supplied Manning with tools and techniques to break into systems. This is a very tricky thing to prove, because it's entirely legal to chat about how one might do something, and the prosecution has to show that one was actively promoting and encouraging the scheme.
(And it should be remembered that *if* he is convicted, he will be jailed in Australia, not the US.)
Assange is charged with assisting an American violate the security of American systems.
hold-on: some years ago it was said that it was because he jumped bail ! Do you intend to say that the UK government lied about that ? Or are you making this all up and hope that the Internet will not remember ?
Or are you making this all up and hope that the Internet will not remember ?
Nope. You're presumably misremembering (fake news!) what really happened. So initially Assange was looking at rape charges. To avoid those, he jumped bail and holed up in the embassy. When he left the embassy, he was arrested for the bail offence. Then the US said 'actually, we'd like a chat' and so rather than Sweden wanting to habeus his corpus, the US did instead.
So now here we are, with Assange having exhausted all his legal options (I hope) and may finally be leaving these shores. But then there'll probably be the question of if he gets PNG'd, or ever tries to return, especially now he can claim family ties with the UK.
I'm also curious just how vindictive the US will be, ie they could just tie him up in jail (obvious flight risk and serious charges) for a couple of years, and then deport him to Australia.
If only he'd come clean and cleared his name on the original charges, we'd not be calling him an alledged sex offender and he may have enjoyed the sun these last few years.
Well, there's also the tiny matter of Manning having stated during her court martial, to which she (actually he back then) pleaded guilty, that Assange had agreed back in 2010 to help with cracking an administrative password on a military system, and subsequently did so.
Her sentence was commuted by President Obama in 2017 and she almost immediately became a candidate for the 2018 Senate race in Maryland, which she lost. She was jailed again for a year in 2019 for refusing to give testimony to a federal grand jury in Virginia regarding the Assange case. In 2021 she was hired by a Swiss cryptocurrency startup to conduct a security audit. Her book is slated to be published in 2022. You really can't make this stuff up!
Anyway, had he just agreed to go to trial in the US back then, he too would have been pardoned by Obama and be running for public office and publishing his own book by now. Think about it! He's essentially already been imprisoned longer that Manning, and she pleaded guilty.
They could appeal based on the US flat out not telling the truth in a UK court. The US has stated the charges and swore those were the only charges. That leaves out the John Doe warrants against the author of the hacking tool "strobe." I know this because I've seen some of the witness statements and I know there will be additional charges once he is in the US.
Perhaps you'll be a witness for the appeal. As things stand before the UK courts an assurance has been given and, without proof that it will be broken, that must be accepted. If it is broken it will result in a huge row, very likely be the basis for getting such charges thrown out of court in the US and make any further extraditions that much more difficult.
If Biden were to pardon Julian Assange when he arrives, and return him home to Australia, then I think the world would start to compare Biden to Carter, essentially a politician with a good attitude. Assange basically only gave everyone access to information about many terrible actions organized by George W. Bush with encouragement from Tony Blair, and now Putin is joining the club.
Originally I thought Biden was a shitty politician but these days, watching all of today's political actions I'm starting to think he's good. "Good?" who knows, but look at all the other idiots today.
If Assange had gone to Sweden, been found guilty of rape, and received the maximum sentence, he would have been released from prison about 4 years ago.
Even if every single allegation made against him was found to be true, I don't think he would have got the maximum sentence.
@katrinab
He was not afraid of a sentence in Sweden but for being extradited to the US from Sweden, who knows, perhaps he believed that could not happen in Britain.
I would let him go, write a book, have a life.
I cannot see him having harmed anybody worth a prison sentence anywhere.
It's far, far easier for the US to extradite someone from the UK than from Sweden.
Not to mention that if he was genuinely afraid of extraordinary rendition, getting on a plane from Sweden to the UK would have made that far, far easier than staying in Sweden. It would have been very easy for a couple of guys in black suits to grab him and bundle him onto "the wrong plane" if that was something the US really wanted to do.
No, he thought there was a good chance he'd get locked up in Sweden.
Then he made himself an actual criminal by jumping bail.
The man is clearly a narcissist who thinks consequences can only happen to other people.
If Biden were to pardon Julian Assange when he arrives, and return him home to Australia, then I think the world would start to compare Biden to Carter, essentially a politician with a good attitude.
Not sure Biden would be able to remember Carter. But you're overlooking a couple of small details. Like leaking the US diplomatic cables. And of course the biggie, Assange's involvement in the great Clinton vs Trump showdown.
AFAIK, DNC 'hacks' aren't part of the (current) charges, but Assange obviously rather annoyed the US Dems. It'd be interesting if Assange reveals anything about his sources, if the DNC stuff becomes relevant. Assange seems keen to save his own skin, and throw his sources under the bus. Timing could be an issue given the US mid-terms approaching, and the Dems probably don't want too many more of their dirty tricks revealed before then.
It was so clearly an understandable mistake that the US publicly acknowledged it, published the video, and started an independent inquiry into it to fully assess what happened and why.
What? They didn't? And they're prosecuting the people who published the video, while they never did any investigation into what happened?
And that's consistent with the US having by now a long history of never investigating their own war crimes? You don't say.
What? They didn't? And they're prosecuting the people who published the video, while they never did any investigation into what happened?
But they did. But this was also one of Assange's problems. Rather than simply reporting the news or just publishing the 'leaked' footage, he decided to editorialise and 'sex it up'.
So the DoD released unedited footage that added context. 'Collateral Murder' glossed over the armed Iraqis walking with the journalists. Those Iraqis were carrying AKs, an RPG and from memory, an LMG. All things that can give a hovering helicopter a bad day. Pilot loses sight of the group, so manouvers to reacquire the group, only to see someone appear around a corner, kneel, and point something large-ish and round at the helicopter. Pilot, having seen someone with an RPG assumes that's what they're seeing and engages, and the rest becomes history.
So that initial engagement seems justified, and contradicts the claims in Assange's 'Collateral Murder' movie. What happened next was I think more dubious, ie firing on the rest of the group and engaging the 'rescue' vehicle.
I thought it was a huge mistake on Assange's part because his video was carefully edited to serve his own agenda. Wikileaks kinda morphed from being stuff the government doesn't want you to see to a propaganda outfit showing what Assange wanted you to see.
This entire post is a complete fabrication.Not a word of that is true.
Cheers for the link, so...
D – Remember that the burden of proof is on the one making the claim.
What is fabricated, or untrue? Also..
A common tactic is to use short phrases, half-thoughts, or word salads which contain few facts and no actual arguments, but contain just enough of a jab to suck you into wasting energy making thorough, well-sourced arguments while they just lean back and continue making weak, low-energy responses to keep you going.
Or just use references to pre-digested thoughts so you can 'debunk' stuff without having to think for yourself. This is an incredibly common tactitc in the climate 'debate'. Which also makes that somewhat easier. So people will often attempt to 'debunk' climate stuff by regurgitating answers from the 'SkepticalScience' website. That was created by a cartoonist and some friends to provide a handy 'fact-checked' response service. Of course that also means the rebuttals become very familiar, and also easy to debunk. My favorites are probably the '97%' meme, created by SkS themselves and claiming that climate models, especially James Hasens are perfect predictors.
If you actually do a little 'fact checking' yourself, you'll find both those SkS claims problematic. But such is politics.
The web page you referenced says nothing whatsoever about the posting you claim it debunks. Furthermore, Google tells me that its author claims to be " a 100 percent crowdfunded rogue journalist, bogan socialist, anarcho-psychonaut, guerilla poet and utopia prepper", which does not wholly inspire me with confidence.
Nah.
That's the whole flaw with Assange's tantrums: he has gone to enormous effort to _avoid_ having his day in court: first in Sweden, then London, and currently the US.
Justice demands he face trial. And those who feel that he did nothing wrong should do everything they can to ensure he is acquitted (pay lawyers, fund investigators, etc).
While there are many things I dislike about the US court system, the fact is that the First Amendment gives people in Assange's position more protection than he would have at the Old Bailey.
You’re recalling incorrectly. The vast majority of US constitutional rights apply to both citizens and non-citizens. The main exceptions are the right to vote in federal elections; eligibility to run for the House of Representatives, the Senate, the vice-presidency, and the presidency; and the “privileges and immunities” clauses of Article IV, Section 2 and the first section of the 14th amendment. Note that most US constitutional rights are limitations on government power rather than special protections for specific groups of people (such as US citizens).
If you think the US govt and legal system haven’t already decided the verdict, you’re deluded. And if you think the First Amendment applies to an Australian citizen committing crimes outside the US you’re mistaken.
For the record, I’m glad he is going. He has evaded the rape charges by skipping bail, hiding in an embassy, disappearing, running away again and more. He’s acted like an entitled, whiny and ungrateful little prick toward people who have helped him, and he obviously sees the law as applying only to others.
I have no idea whether he raped anyone in Sweden. But rape is a disgusting and violent crime. Do his alleged victims not deserve justice? Should he not be tried like any normal suspect? Apparently he thinks not. Assange has gone to extraordinary lengths to evade justice, leveraging every opportunity his fame and circumstances afford him. He’s also shamelessness abused the kindness of others in that same quest.
How can he have the chutzpah to berate governments for not investigating and trying alleged criminals when he reuses to face the music himself? He’s a grifter and a coward and I’ll be glad when he’s gone. I would rather my taxes be spent on a more worthy cause.
whizzing on about how bad it is to extradite him.
lets see major events
Accused of rape in Sweden, skips out of the country to the UK
Arrested under a euro arrest warrent, told he'll be extradited to Sweden to answer charges
Released on 1 million bail and has to live at a set address.
Appeals fail.. extradition order signed sending him to Sweden.
Skips bail losing 1 million quid in the process , hides in the embassy for 7 years
Pisses off ambassador, get kicked out of embassy and arrested for skipping bail
1 years prison time for skipping bail
Asks for bail while he fights extradition to the US.
Judge laughs.
Current status: in prison after being told he'll be extradited to the US
Still has appeals and legal avenues to go down to avoid this.
If he'd answered charges in Sweden, he'd more than likely been told no charges to answer and released... even if convicted of rape, he'd have got 5 yrs,released after 2 yr and deported to Auz
The last 10 years of his life have been of his own making......
Let's see what we have here...
> Accused of rape in Sweden, skips out of the country to the UK
I believe he left the country before any charges were levelled at him. With a busy speaking schedule, it's hardly unusual to be off to the next location the next day. You do know that the two women who accused him are Social Democrat party acolytes? And that the lawyer who represented them is also a Social Democrat and they all are members of the same church?
> Skips bail losing 1 million quid in the process ...
Actually, he caused the people who helped post bail for him to suddenly owe the state lots of money. Many bridges were probably burned.
> ...hides in the embassy for 7 years
He was sure the Swedish Government would look in the other direction while the CIA collected him from pre-trial detention and "rendered" him to US justice.
The Swedes have form for this having allowed the rendition of two Swedish citizens not long after 9/11. They were taken to a black site and tortured. Even though the government eventually admitted it had happened, the foreign minister who authorised it had conveniently been murdered. Anyway, you can't prosecute a Swedish politician - they have immunity from prosecution regarding anything they do in their political capacity.
I'd say he was more than entitled to suspect he'd be on Air CIA sharpish if he let the Swedes get their hands on him.
> If he'd answered charges in Sweden, he'd more than likely been told no charges to answer and released...
> even if convicted of rape, he'd have got 5 yrs,released after 2 yr and deported to Auz
See above.
> The last 10 years of his life have been of his own making......
Possibly, but what Assange's plight is really about is the fact that he aired the USA's dirty war laundry to the public and thought that the glare of publicity would protect him from retribution. That's a naive mistake and one which means that he will probably spend the rest of his life in prison. In his view, he was doing a good and noble thing in showing the world how much the USA was lying about what went on during the invasion of Iraq. There are many who share that opinion.
I've never met him, but I get the distinct impression that I wouldn't like him much if I did due to his rather large ego. An ego which caused him to seriously underestimate who his actions would upset and how far they would go to make sure he would pay for shaming the USA.
Objectively though, I can ignore the man and defend his actions. He should immediately be released and given asylum in the UK or given safe passage to the destination of his choosing along with his wife and children.
He certainly won't get any justice in the USA.
This narrative fell apart in 2016 when he held back leaked data from the Republican National Committee while gleefully leaking the DNC emails and whatever he thought would get Donal Trump into the White House.
That's when it became obvious that he had an agenda, and it wasn't truth or justice.
@grizewald “I believe he left the country before any charges were levelled at him.”
The Swedish police had not charged him with any offense when he left. But he had been accused of rape before he left Sweden.
That said he certainly didn’t skip Sweden because he had been accused of rape. Leaving more than a month after the allegations became public is not skipping. 20/8/2010 arrest warrant issued for rape and molestation*, 27/9/2010 Assange leaves Sweden.
*Warrant withdrawn a day later by Stockholm's chief prosecutor, Eva Finne saying "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape,". Only for the investigation to be reopened 1/9/2010 by Sweden's Director of Prosecution Marianne Ny, but no warrant was issued.
@Boris the Cockroach : good choice of pseudo
lets see major events
yes, lets
1 years prison time for skipping bail
he's been imprisoned since april 2019, that's 3 years : you're a liar. And now if you pretend that the 2 additional years are because of the extradition, then you acknowledge that he was right from day 1 : you're illogical.
I think you missed a bit with your edits(bit like St Julian)
1 year in jail for skipping bail
Extradition order when that sentence is completed.
Applies for bail while appealing said extradition order.
Bail refused because of of him being percieved as a flight risk and having previously skipped out on bail
Thats why he's been remanded to jail
As I've often posted about St Julian... the guy is a dick and most of whats happened to him is because he's a dick (and alledged use of that dick in Sweden)
Oh and my nick has all to do with my job status rather than anything St Julian related. so there :p
2 additional years on remand because, for obvious reasons, he has been refused bail. Even the US takes "time served" in account if subsequently sentenced to jail. If the US sticks to the guarantees it's given the UK government, then at most he's going to get about 5 years, to be served in Australia, will get the two years on remand taken into account and then, depending the Aussie justice system and any agreements they may make (or have made) with the US, his time in jail may be as much as halved and released "on licence". He could, conceivably, spend as little as one year in an Australian jail. Then again, he will spend time in US jail on remand awaiting his court date and during the trial. If that takes a long time, it's even possible that by the time he reaches Australia, there may be little to no time in jail.
I’d just park Saint Julian in a nice Club Fed type Federal facility and let moss grow over him. When his lawyers file a Speedy Trial motion, point out that there are complications due to the long drawn out extradition process, mostly due to him, and that the trial will be held as soon as possible. When he’s spent roughly the same time inside as Bradley/Chelsea Manning, drop all charges for humanitarian reasons and deport him to Oz. No muss, no fuss, no expensive trial. And being parked in a Club Fed isn’t exactly hard time.
Now, if he were silly enough to escape from, or even attempt to escape from, the Club Fed, then drop the hammer on him, hard. And that would be a new offense, not linked to whatever he was extradited for, so any promises made at the time of extradition would no longer be binding. Hell, I wouldn’t put it past the Feds if they left a door open and unguarded just to see what he did…
I disagree. Assange is not and never has been a journalist of any kind, let alone an investigative one.
He is an asshole, but that's beside the point.
All he did was recieve information and publish it. The US Government didn't like that, but that's not necessarily a reason to slam a foreign national into a US jail.
After all, the US jealously guards all its nationals that did hideous things in other countries, so what goes around should come around.
It's Assange's ego that's got him in to this. If he'd just anonymously published everything leaked to him he'd have been fine, but he's made himself the public face of Wikileaks, only leaked selectively and chosen to editorialise on what he's leaked.
Made himself the story, which is the first thing journalists (if he were one, which he is not) are taught not to do.
Once again, the zealous will fail the "heavy burden of showing justification for the enforcement of such a [prior] restraint."
New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713
A mere promise to publish is not a conspiracy to engage in espionage. Think of Trump as a far stupider version of Nixon. To feed his unschooled populist supporters, Trump focused on personalities Not facts or the law of course. Pamala Anderson called Trump a "Toxic Coward."
Now Biden the ponderously dense disengaged Trump second Term looks to the Easter Bunny for answers.
In the USA, Assange will get the best First Amendment Attorney. The Government will rely on recent law graduates trying to make a name for themselves at the DOJ. The DOJ will lose the case in flying colours, just as they lost cases like the Ted Stephens case. No jurist is going to extend the gov reach into the First Amendment.
Assange should accept extradition and give Joe Biden the headache of a lifetime just in front of the Midterm elections as the US Economy tumbles into the ashpit of Trump Biden Smoot Hawley Tariffs, double-digit inflation, and rising interest rates, Trump's attack on the capital which is espionage, while Joe tries to hide with his new cat at the beach. A man and his cat...
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
