Posts by Scorchio!! 1640 publicly visible posts • joined 30 Jul 2010
"They have sought assurances from Sweden that he wont be exrtradited from there to the US, and that assurance has not been given"
Oh but it has; Under EAW legislation Sweden cannot extradite Assange to the US without first asking the UK, the place from which the Swedes want to extract Assange. They have said to the US that they are prepared to allow them to have first go on Assange from the UK, but the US declined.
"Surely he doesn't need to be made a diplomat, only given a diplomatic passport. It's not the same thing and fuck-all to do with the host nation."
Passport control and the correct and proper issue of diplomatic passports is everything to do with the host nation. You may have difficulty with this, you may stamp your feet and you may thqweeem and thqweeeem and thqweeeeeeeem, but these are the facts of life. Julie has run out of legal road.
"Ecuador could go through the procedures of making Assange an accredited diplomat. Then he would be protected, according to international law. But, the U.K. could choose to disregard international law (see, invasion of Iraq, illegal actions in Libya, etc. for more recent examples) . . ."
WRONG; not in your wildest dreams. Aside from the fact that such appointments have to be approved by the host country (that would be the UK) it is the case that such appointments cannot be made to facilitate the escape of people under criminal investigation. If it's good for former members of repressive governments, it's good for Julie.
"Stick him in a giant diplomatic bag?"
Oh yes, indeed. I can just see the COBRA plan for such an eventuality; the area including Knightsbridge and adjacent parts is shut down to major terrorist/fire/criminal incident. Naturally the 'diplomatic bag' has been shadowed and discreetly guarded by some 30 Met police and SAS, who of course realise that it is their duty to ensure that the 'diplomatic bag' is not assassinated. When the 'incident' occurs the area is locked down. No one moves and, after a few hours, the 'diplomatic bag' runs out of oxygen, causing its contents to break loose (to breathe necessary air).... ....into the waiting arms of Det. Insp. Snidely Smythe of the diplomatic protection squad.
"Would it not be possible for the embassy to give him Ecuadorian nationality and then temporary diplomatic status to get him out of the embassy and to Ecuador?"
This has been discussed a lot in the press and political circles; these things cannot be back dated to before when the alleged offences were committed and thus, in national and international law, cannot be granted. Similarly, there is no precedence of asylum over a pre-existing criminal case for, e.g., rape. Indeed it is precisely these sorts of alleged crimes that cause people to seek asylum in order to escape from such offenders.
"Taking it like a man from our Overlords as usual."
Swedish overlords? Under the terms of the EAW he cannot go to the US without first Sweden asking the UK for permission; it would be easier for the US to extradite him from here than from Sweden, but don't let this trouble your conspiracy laden brain.
For you this link: http://zapatopi.net/afdb/
For Julie these links: http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/ http://www.dogcondoms.com/
If only you had worn a condom, Julie.
"He will be hamstrung from going anywhere for the rest of his life, but Ecuador sounds lovely..."
"Brave Sir Julian ran away Bravely ran away, away When danger reared its ugly head He bravely turned his tail and fled Yes, brave Sir Julian turned about And gallantly he chickened out Bravely taking to his feet He beat a very brave retreat Bravest of the brave, Sir Julian!"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/14/julian-assange-asylum-ecuador-wikileaks?CMP=twt_gu
As an observation, I am sure that Julie is trying to construct a way of 'working' out of Ecuador. However, his main problem will be with the harsh and repressive treatment of persons working as journalists in that country. Not that Julie is a journalist.
This is merely a head game, designed to increase the probability that Assange's eccentric behaviour will result in another silly impulse. Assange cannot win as things stand, irrespective of what any one says. Unless Scotty can beam him to Ecuador he must first pass through UK territory to reach Ecuador. If and when this happens Assange will be nicked. Either that or die in Ecuador's embassy, due to age or ill health arising from his new unhealthy life style.
"Which liberal country would that be then?"
Not this one; http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2010/wha/154504.htm http://www.hrw.org/world-report-2012/world-report-2012-ecuador
Sounds like a haven for pukka journalists, right? Riiiiiiiight. Just the sort of place where one might find a creature like Assange, a self described journalist; his predilection for double standards being a perfect match for Ecuador, including his proposed 'pay wall' for information retrieval, accepting a down payment on his autobiography from his publisher and then withdrawing, his £80,000 'salary', his rage when the Grauniad started publishing information formerly in his clutch only describing the information as 'his property' (I expect the irony has not escaped the security services of the country from whom it was originally stolen), his hypocrisy on the safety of Afghan informants whose data he gave away ( http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/leaked-details-put-informant-lives-in-danger/story-e6frg6so-1225898206990 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/7917955/Wikileaks-Afghanistan-Taliban-hunting-down-informants.html ), and on the story goes...
...until conviction, sentencing and serving the sentence. In a bubbery.
"It's not the Swedish charges that JA is worried about avoiding, that would probably not amount to much. No, it's the giftwrapping and presenting to the US of A afterward for a long holiday"
This is an exquisite specimen of the silliness in the matter; Assange cannot be extradited from Sweden without the prior permission of the country to whom they present the EAW; this was deliberately included in the EU legislation on the matter to prevent just such attempts to sneak suspects out the back door, from a country with supposedly stronger ties to, e.g., the US. However, the UK is more likely to allow the US to take Assange than Sweden is, and the Swedes offered to allow the US case go ahead and have greater priority.
So Assange, if he does go to Sweden, is less likely to end up in the US than if he stays in the UK. To suggest otherwise sounds very lower 6th and immature.
HTH. HAVND
Here is an update; according to the Today Programme, around 07 .15 this morning, asylum/refugee status cannot be granted to people charged or about to be charged with such crimes as rape, and (IIRC) the Today Programme journalists confirmed that the Swedes have a warrant for his arrest and the charges prepared for their ever loving friend.
"Unless of course, it was the intention of these ex-CIA agents to lead the criminal activity to Germany, and away from the CIA's door where it would be spotted by blood hounds like you. With respect, Scorchio!!, this wasn't a tip-off at all."
Kindly piss off with the misattributions; I did not make the comments that you attribute to me, and you do yourself an injury, that is to say you appear to be more k00ky and more unreliable.
HTH.
"You wouldn't happen to have a link to that transcript w John Humphrys?"
Hello there my friend; I do have a link, but it is about a hundred miles away from here. I don't know when I can make it to my network, and it is always down when I am away.
Just did a search. In this interview ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9308000/9308216.stm ) he says he is at peace, and some bullshit about loving women. It's quite stomach churning as a whole because the man shows no insight at all.
"Dear Man from Mars, I have a friend who is a prolific letter writer of the pen and ink variety. He is very artistic and has an unusual handwriting style. His letters contain small doodles and smatterings of other languages. The result is that nobody can understand WTF they are about."
If you're familiar with Usenet you may remember Archimedes Plutonium and even Hammond, both of whom are reminiscent of this poster. "Mostly harmless"?
"...but not forever. He'll eventually face his accusers in Sweden."
Indeed. If T-ray scanners can penetrate buildings, diplomatic 'packages' will be no problem, and I fully expect that the UK authorities will have advised the embassy of this. Thus Assange either stays there, or runs the gauntlet, he stays or he goes; it's "Daddy or chips" time, and it would seem that he has already had his chips.
"It need not be a bag, as long as it is labelled as diplomatic baggage, e.g. the Dikko Affair."
Indeed! Just picture the progress of the 'diplomatic bag' down Knightsbridge when, suddenly, a terrorist incident, fire or other major disaster occurs, causing traffic to come to a complete standstill. Armed police everywhere, the 'bag' is given priority protection by the British police as a matter of courtesy to our Ecuadorian diplomatic guests.
Suddenly, after two hours the 'bag' trembles and shakes, as its inhabitant realises that it has come to the end of its air supply, and bursts out, gulping air into its lungs; "you're nicked sonny boi". Plus of course the Ecuadorian diplomatic mission would be in delta sierra. That is, of course, if they are sufficiently silly to send a man sized package from out of their embassy, it being that normal diplomatic traffic is far smaller. Especially for low profile diplomatic missions from small countries. To say nothing of modern scanning equipment, which could be deployed in advance of such an attempt, whilst advising the his excellency the Ambassador that we can tell if his staff are trafficking in human bodies.
"Even if Assange get's asylum there is no way for him to get out of the UK without being arrested short of Ecuador giving him diplomatic immunity and even then the UK government could arrest him as he didn't enter the country with a diplomatic passport so his diplomatic status wouldn't be valid."
Soon Julie will have to make up his mind, 'Daddy or chips':
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19251943
"And it does appear that Sweden does have a different definition of 'rape' to the rest of the world."
Leaving your semen inside of someone who does not want it, but wants the protection of a condom has long been a serious judicial problem in every European country that I can think of, except for the UK, where people still think it is alright. In Germany Nadja Benaissa was lucky to be in receipt of a two year suspended sentence, though she was not charged with rape of course: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-10983227
This is a deadly matter, involving playing Russian roulette with hapless victims lives. If Assange had unprotected sex with these women, against their will, then rape is an appropriate charge, though not consistent with the gravity of the crime which is potentially life threatening. Remember, Assange has a record of promiscuity. Read the transcript of his BBC interview with John Humphrys.
"Wikileaks, at least, seems to put up the embarrassing stuff and leave out stuff that could get operatives killed."
Oh yes, right:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/leaked-details-put-informant-lives-in-danger/story-e6frg6so-1225898206990
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/7917955/Wikileaks-Afghanistan-Taliban-hunting-down-informants.html
He said in front of witnesses that these 'informants' knew what they were getting themselves into, that it was a risk they ran. The paywall, the autobiog - he took the retainer, ran from the publisher withdrawing consent, and then bitched when they published to recoup their fee - the £80,000 'salary' and other rackets; how much did he give Bradley Manning? Peanuts.
"Convict is the noun applied to someone who has been convicted of a crime and sent to prison"
No, it is the noun applied to someone convicted of a crime
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange#Hacking_and_conviction
"A convict is "a person found guilty of a crime and sentenced by a court" OE#R "a person serving a sentence in prison":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convict
I suggest you invest in remedial googling and reading skills.
HAVND
"Julian Assange has never been charged with anything, let alone rape."
His lawyer was informed that the Swedish police wanted him for questioning, prior to charging him (this is the requirement of the Swedish CJS); not long after his lawyer had been so informed Assange disappeared and reappeared in England. It should be noted that, whereas Assange's Swedish counsel initially denied that the Swedish police had contacted him during the relevant period, he subsequently retracted this denial and affirmed that they had contacted him; this took place in an English court, thus the witnesses and record are a sight more impeccable than your claim's.
As far as questioning by email or video are concerned, no; it takes place in the original jurisdiction and nowhere else. Questioning requires monitoring the subject carefully for subtle non verbal behaviours that inform the interrogator whether or not dissimulation is taking place, and in response to which questions. This leads to further questions in the appropriate area.
The Assange idea of electronic questioning is unprecedented, invalid and typical of someone who has something to fear. FWIW he cannot be extradited from Sweden to the US without prior UK approval, under the terms of the EAW.
Google can be your friend too, so why don't you Google the data that I have just given you on the convict, Assange.
"The Swedish authorities, after initially saying there was no case to answer, changed their minds and demanded that he turn himself in for questioning, in person."
Hah, I suggest you read Gumby's exhumation of that fairy story.
"The Russians could have easily pointed strong Microwave energy at him to kill him or try to make him sick."
Indeed, as RAF personnel based in Cyprus once found out, when someone unwisely walked in front of an active dish. He fell out before his commander could give the word.
Well they cracked the enigma code for sure, didn't they? All of these Briddish stories about Polish agents handing over a complete machine, followed by tales about Turing and Tommy Flowers (who didn't design the first working computer) are all fluff in the minds of the Briddish. Uhuh.
"Still, it's no accident Godwin mentions Nazis instead of something else."
It is a fine example of the 'recency effect'. Otherwise he'd have been citing Roman barbarities, e.g. (...others include Turkish genocide of Armenians...). Forget the punishment of decimation, remember crucifixion punishments; hundreds of people crucified alongside roads and left to die and rot, the subsequent stench hanging around these necessary lines of communication for however long it takes for microbial organisms, carrion and scavengers to remove the trace. Think of the complete destruction of Carthage, the slaughter of of the city of Carthage's citizens, and enslavement of those who remained. Consider the Roman habit of putting Christians in the arena, to fight big cats with their bare hands. Lidice was nothing compared to Roman might and anger.
If you prefer to focus on anti Semitism, remember the burning of Jews in York and Winchester, that Jews were ironically allowed back in this country because of the very barbaric Cromwell.
OTOH, consider Stalin. Under his reign there were always some 11 million people in penal labour battalions, with a very high mortality rate, and that is merely the tip. The main reason why we do not focus on this example? Because during WWII our forerunners were taught that Stalin was our ally and, indeed, the myth continued all the way up to at least the 1980s, when students at the university where I studied told me of the virtuousness of Stalinism as opposed to western democracy.
No one is clean, right down to the Barbary ('Libyan') pirates who raided Europe (particularly the south west of England and Ireland) for white gold, aka slaves. Throughout Europe they made off with at least 1.5 million.
As to your last exhortation, I'm an ex soldier, I've seen active duty, I've been a lot closer to death as a civvy in a very dangerous job and I take most exhortations with a pinch of salt, especially when they are phrased as an instruction; I'm done with orders.
HTH.
Indeed and, just as it is not possible to defame anonymous people, it is impossible to be in breach of copyright in respect of anonymous people. To claim their supposed rights they must step forward. Admittedly the bracelets that will be fastened onto their wrists will not be fashionable, but who GAF?
"B. Godwin's Law. You lose."
Go and read it; Godwin merely stated "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches". It is not a law, it is merely a supposed observation of probability (one that I've not seen investigated, and I'm not sure that I would like to be responsible for designing the research to investigate such catch all silliness) but, there again, as an online discussion grows longer the probability that anything may be said or compared grows. There is nothing particularly special, insightful or even scientific about Godwin's 'law', which is not a law at all. It is a banal, catch all quotable passage that has captured people's imaginations and even caused them to remark that the conversation must be over, Godwin's 'law' has been confirmed. Very weak and, even if it has been confirmed, so what? What fresh insight do we derive from this?
It is also fair to say that the owner of a symbol cannot be held responsible for something done by people adopting it as their symbol. Otherwise the Pringles logo would have to fall due to the use of their clothing by violent, right wing football thugs, ditto Ben Sherman 40 years ago; latterly, given their direct connection with the German war machine Hugo Boss would not be allowed to manufacture fashion goods today, since they were responsible for the notoriously fashionable, glamorous nature of German military clothing during the war, and there is a right wing group in modern Germany that wears garments with a logo (I can't recall the specifics and will carefully avoid naming the one that I think it is) that they also use as a symbol.
Much that was symbolic of German industrial, design and scientific prowess and associated with the events that culminated in a meeting on the Soltau-Lüneberg heath sometime in May 1945 still exists. Look at modern Audi design, particularly the Audi TT, Mercedes, IG Farben... ...the culture of a nation was embedded, poured, moulded into the events that overtook Germany, partly because a charismatic - you might say daemonic - leader browbeat the chancellor into giving in, even though he lacked the neccessary elected seats (by one), who bullied, browbeat and frightened his own people, shaping their will in the manner of steel being bashed on an anvil, frightening some, capitalising on the resentment in others (after WW I Lloyd-George was disgusted at the reparations being inflicted on the Germans, pointedly saying it would lead to another war, and he was correct, or this discussion would not be taking place now). It is unsurprising that the cultural symbols hijacked by these people survived, and came out on the other side.
By another way of illustration, remember this; the Swastika was taken from an older culture and reversed: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4183467.stm Perhaps we are going to hold them to account for WWII, instead of the French who felt that German war reparations should be so vicious that their recession and currency crisis would cause the price of a loaf of bread to require a full barrow of notes in payment... ...or perhaps the Germans, who forced the French to sign a humiliating treaty in the Hall of Mirrors at Versailles, or the French before them who inflicted the same on them, and so on back in history, each regime marching under its own (monarchical) symbols.
Godwin? Godwin amuses but contributes no enlightenment.
I forgot to include this link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/7917955/Wikileaks-Afghanistan-Taliban-hunting-down-informants.html
Now do GFY. I won't even criticise you if you do it gently.
" "I was thinking, for example, of the Afghan informants whose location data are in the public domain"
Please kindly post the "location data" of three (or at your choice, more) of those "Afghan informants". Since that information, as you claim, is "in the public domain" it shouldn't take you long. Many thanks. "
This will have to do: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/leaked-details-put-informant-lives-in-danger/story-e6frg6so-1225898206990
As you can see the story has been in the public domain for a couple of years. I do have some more data at home which I'll try to put up when I finally return.
As far as the meaning 'persil' is concerned, it is a UK household washing powder. Unelected, unappointed and unsupervised; he has taken on a moral position, has nominated himself as a guardian of public morals (whilst clearly not giving a damn about those whose lives his acts threaten, and his witnessed comments posted up by me are a tour de force in arrogance and heartlessness; they chose to be informants, they must run the risk), he is in possession of stolen data that he has released without supervision or any comeback from anyone in the world, except of course for the inevitable legal action that will swallow him up in the longer run.
Assange has been convicted on many counts in Australia. I forget if it is 17 or 25, perhaps someone will give you the enlightenment that you so clearly need; among other things he was convicted of hacking a Pentagon US airforce network and stealing passwords, and even of breaking into the network of the very Australian police force responsible for investigating the Pentagon and other hacks. He was let off a gaol sentence because (IMNSVHO) his sob story appears to have gulled the judge, who warned him that his next conviction would land him a spell inside. These are the best that I am prepared to do, since I have already researched and posted up the data for lazy people who are evidently unable to do so for themselves, and request that others do it for them:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange#Hacking_and_conviction
http://www.the-two-malcontents.com/2010/12/the-son-assange-fathered-with-a-girl-of-17-as-he-learned-the-dark-arts-of-computer-hacking-in-a-rundown-cottage/
I clearly will be unsurprised if Assange is again convicted, this time for rape. Why is he frightened? Why does he (wrongly) believe that extradition from Sweden to the US is on the cards (actually it will be harder, since the EAW prevents this without the authority of the releasing country, the UK)? I'm fairly certain that he knows that somewhere he has left a thumbprint that proves his guilt, and that he knows for taking on country in what amounts to a warlike manner (stealing classified information) he faces retribution. No surprises there, and I am sure that the Afghan informants whose lives he placed at risk will probably find a sliver of satisfaction if he is convicted. Again.
I will not offer you any more data until I return home in the near future, but it is enough that Assange is a convicted criminal who has released data thus threatening the lives of Afghan informants and, if you cast your eyes around, you will find a wealth of salacious information on his behaviour in respect of women.
Don't put bloody words in my mouth. I was thinking, for example, of the Afghan informants whose location data are in the public domain (thus the Taliban), putting them at risk. I was thinking of Assange's statement in front of witnesses that informants are in it on their own, that they took the risks knowingly. As I think of this I recall the many women murdered ('executed') by these bastards, and not just the recent such incident.
You people are so full of it that you accept this self elected, unscrutinised, unsupervised convict as persil. He is not. As to the women he supposedly raped, I hope that he faces trial and, if guilty, that he does time.
So no, I do not mean to voice the fantasies in your head.
"It's an American compny"
Weeell, this is very true, but it is also an American company operating on (choose your location) terra firma belonging to another international legal actor, and thus legal system. In this country Google must obey our laws, or suffer an appopriate fate. Just like Islamic extremists, freetards, Kim Dotcom (bloody fool), Julian Assange, and so on. :-)
Personally I don't trust Google at all, and use them only where there is no alternative that I can find.
"Someone would have had to:
1/ Had their wifi setup without Wifi encryption.
2/ Been using it at the exact moment Google drove by.
3/ Been transferring something sensitive over a non-SSL link."
All well and good. However, excusing theft/misappropriation because a shop or house is temporarily unattended does not count in law, and that is where the rubber hits the road. That said, there is something to be said for a modem licence, or perhaps a mandatory security set up fee for those whose IT/net competence extends to the acronym 'LOL'.
" "And then get off your fucking high-horse arses & fucking vote"
I'll vote when there is someone worth voting for but by that time I will probably be collecting my pension if there is actually one for me to collect!
"learn how politics really works"
It doesn't work for the public, it works for the people in power, and it works to keep them in power no matter how shit they are!"
Not necessarily so. If you have an interest in politics, if your views are held by a significant proportion of the population, then the time to mobilise has arrived; join the party that is nearest to your views and wants and, with those like minded people you persuade to also join, work to change policies; link up with people who have similar views in different seats, and change the party to represent your views. If you are from a minority view it looks as though you are shit out of luck. That would also be the case where setting up your own party is concerned. An example of a minority that tried to inflict itself on the Labour party and thus the nation is the Trotskyist 'militant tendency' ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militant_tendency ), and another is the instance of extremist Muslims who tried to take over the Tower Hamlets Labour party, resulting in the Labour party's executive placing Tower Hamlets under 'special measures'.
Either get involved or stop the moaning and whining. Politics is not like a restaurant, where you the consumer order a meal and it appears on your table; like sex, politics is a matter of participation (if you have yet to experience sexual intercourse try using your hand, and then progress to interacting with real people, not computers). You have to farm the vegetables, harvest them and cook them for yourself (I accept in these days of 'ready cooked food' in supermarkets, obesity and a culture favouring computer gaming over the exercise for which our bodies evolved, which it needs daily, that this example may sail over your head). Granted that since WWII many people in this country have expected everything to appear freely and spontaneously, something which starting with the Labour party (and later the Tories who tried to keep up with the free for all bonanza) instilled in us. Now people no longer have to bring up their own children, oh no; these commodities can be placed in battery care, whilst the workers can do their Orwellian duty to the party, making more babies and simultaneously holding a career, earning money, so that they can buy bigger houses (purchased using unrealistically large, unsustainable mortgages in an economic environment run by people whose knowledge of economics has more to do with the play pen than it does reality) in which to place more babies.
You will never derive from politics all of the things that you want, unless you impose your own dictatorship on the nation; then the only satisfied person will be you. Politics is a matter of compromise and common sense and if you do not vote then you have only yourself to blame if the BNP gain office.
He was convicted, and I'm beginning to see that you are trolling. You've been told many, many times that the Swedes cannot extradite Assange to the US without UK approval (terms of the EAW), that it would be easier to extradite him from the UK, and yet you keep raising the Sweden matter as if it were a US gambit to have him extradited therefrom to the USA: no, and it was in anticipation of such manoeuvres that the terms of the EAW were constructed.
However, and because I see what you are doing, I'll let you fester in your own oil. HTH. HAND.
"Just to point out he could leave the embassy as a diplomatic package [be it wrapped in brown paper or not] and transend to the nearest local international airport for transport to a country of his choice."
This has already been discussed, extensively. If a large package leaves the embassy it will probably find its progress halted in the Knightsbridge area (which is very busy anyhow) for a significantly long period of time; probably a 'terrorist' incident or a very, very serious accident. The area will be locked down and the 'package' will run short of both air and patience. The package will have no alternative but to unwrap and will be welcomed into the ever loving arms of HM Constabulary.
If there is an unattributed reduction of one heat source in the embassy this will be all the more certain.
"A$$nut will get his political asylum granted from Ecuador."
As one of the nyms pointed out, Ecuador has an extradition treaty with the USA. Perhaps Jules isn't vebby bwight either. For sure he will need to beam himself up and then down again to avoid the land in between the embassy and, hmm, well, whatever protected territory is nearest and will get him to journalistic heaven ( http://www.hrw.org/americas/ecuador ).
Chavez might be pleased to house him, only he like his Ecuadorian friends believes in muzzling 'journalists' (if Julie still believes that he is one). Julie would have a lot to report about in South America. It will make his nipples hard with frenzied excitement, and he will find out how lucky he has been so far. Farking eejit that he is.
How is this for spicy meat balls: http://www.thelocal.se/32354/20110302/
"[...] District Judge Howard Riddle, accused Hurtig of deliberately misleading the court, calling him "unreliable".
[...]
Following the criticism, the Swedish Bar Association has decided to demand Hurtig provide an explanation of his actions.
"We sent Hurtig a letter last week and asked him to explain himself," Bar Association secretary general Anne Ramberg told the TT news agency.
She described Judge Riddle's statements as a "extremely serious critique" of the Swedish lawyer.
"If I'm not satisfied with Hurtig's explanation, I may go to the bar association's governing board, and after that the disciplinary committee, which has the final say on any possible consequences," she said."
Let that be noted by the Assange fan bois and gurlz.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
