Julian Assange is a prick.

[Dags90]

No, at least not under normal circumstances. There may be a provision for serious crimes where in absentia is allowed, but likely only in cases where the defendant has already died.

Of course, part of the problem is that he hasn't actually been indicted. He's only wanted for questioning.

I wish I was only wanted for questioning in Sweden. I feel like I could mooch free airfare and possibly lodging out of that.

*mental note* Next time I'm in Sweden, be a witness to some crime on the last day.

 

[Mr Pantomime]

ITT: People who normally advocate "Innocent Until Proven Guilty" condemn a man as a rapist because he's a coward.

I don't care about Julian Assange one way or the other, I just wanted Wikileaks to live. I don't think it really did.

Oh yes, add in the obligatory <link=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.267231-The-Paradox-of-Heaven#10208004>OMG THIS GOES IN RELIGION AND POLITIX. Except really, it does. Please stop bringing this stuff up in Off-Topic.

MODS, DO NOT PUT THIS IN RELIGION AND POLITICS, WE ALREADY HAVE ONE OF THEESE GOING ON AND DO NOT NEED A SECOND BEFORE IT HAS EVEN GONE OFF THE FRONT PAGE.

MODS PUT THIS IN R&P. DO WHAT I SAY BECAUSE IM USING THE BIGGER LETTERS!

Heh, Politiks

Personally, I wouldn't trust the US Government, nor would I doubt its influence. They're sneaky. I like to think this rabbit hole runs a lot deeper than Hes a prick and a rapist/hes not either of those. Like if Wikileaks was a proxy of the US Government which they use to spread misinformation. That sounds a lot better.

 

[Veylon]

Is there really any contradiction between him being a horrible person and providing a public good? Lots of "heroes" have done and been things that would be considered beyond the pale by lesser mortals. Patton and McArthur were jerks, but that never stopped anyone from building statues and naming things after them.

 

[Nurb]

It was a broken condom.

Sweden considers it rape. This is all they could come up with after the case was weak enough to be dropped already.

It's BS to get him to sweden, then be disappeared into a US or UK blacksite out of the way of human rights oversight so they can ask him about those papers he released with a car battery to the nuts.

 

[Athinira]

Just wanted to poke my head in here and suggest that you go commit a crime, and then try to sell the idea that you don't have to recognize the police's authority to arrest you because you don't trust the courts. Except you're not a global celebrity who can sell himself as a political game chip to the highest bidder so I doubt it would go well for you.

Of course it wouldn't go well for me. Besides going into hiding, the police would of course have the manpower to bring me down.

That doesn't mean i can't try if i feel it is the right course of action.

If a woman tells you she will only have sex with you if you wear a condom and you don't put one on and have sex with her anyway, either under duress or sneakily without her knowing, that's sex without consent and therefor rape. If you have sex with someone who is unconscious, that's rape. Sorry to ruin your weekend.

That's only the allegations of the women in question, and not necessarily what happened.

If you have followed the story from the start - and actually poked a bit in it - you would realize that these women also praised Assange (on Twitter amongst other things) AFTER having sex with him. So apparently there was nothing to regret for them in the start - until later when they decided to both accuse him of rape at the same time, long after the fact.

So the problem is that this story smells already from the start (and I'm not usually one to believe in crazy conspiracies), but the second problem here is that only Assange and the women know what REALLY happened, so if they ever manage to get Assange to court over there, it's going to their word against his, but because of the Swedish rape laws, Assange is pretty much already at a disadvantage, even if he is the one telling the truth in this matter.

I'm bored by conspiracy theories.

Rape is one of the more common cases being lied about in court (both inside and outside of Sweden), and there are many convicted rapists who today who were innocent, but where the woman decided to call the police anyway. Conspiracy theories and rape cases can very well go hand in hand.

In fact, here in Denmark we had a recent case of 3 boys who were exonerated of rape after spending a year in prison because one of the brothers of the boys managed to get the "victim" to confess that the sex was consentual (and filmed her confession secretly). The boys are now free, and the girl is facing charges of false accusations.

So even if the extradition conspiracy-theory bores you (which still doesn't mean they have to bore the rest of us, including Assange), i can guarentee you that just within the world of rape, they are very relevant. And hell, this happened in Denmark where we have sane rape-laws.

I think you'll find that most prosecutors will go to great lengths to try and convict suspected rapists. I find it hard to fault them for zeal.

...but on the other hand, you don't find it hard to fault Assange for going to great lengths to try to escape that very zeal? )

Look at the pot calling the kettle black.

Assange is a self serving little weasel who's putting his own hide and wellbeing above that of the truth. If it's true that he did NOT rape those women, a great hero of honesty should stand up for the truth like a man. I do not respect someone who is only brave when his skin isn't on the line.

Again, just because YOU trust the justice system doesn't mean we have to.

First of all, the "truth" isn't a very relevant parameter. Some countries have ridiculous laws that you might be convicted under, while in every other sane country the thing they were convicted for isn't even a crime. In some countries, for example, homosexuality is a crime (punishable by prison or in severe cases, death). If someone was alleged to be a homosexual and fled his country to escape court, would you also call him a coward for not standing up to the "truth" about his sexuality? For someone who is so busy cursing Assange for being a self-serving little weasel, i doubt you in the situation i just described would have gone to court willingly in the name of truth. The justice system wasn't invented for the truth, they were invented to convict people for breaking LAWS, and laws can be sensible or ridiculous.

But then again, i can't respect someone who is only brave when his skin isn't on the line, so I'll see how you fare the day YOU end up in a similar situation (see what i did there)? I'm sure you won't be bored of conspiracy theories by then.

And yes, i did just compare swedish rape laws to countries outlawing homosexuality. Because both are ridiculous (to a different degree, yes, but they still ARE). I haven't even talked about the extradition in this post yet, and if i had the option, i would have done the same as Assange if i knew i was innocent (which we don't know about Assange, but he knows).

 

[idarkphoenixi]

Julian Assange is a prick. First of all, the guy sexually assaults two women, then he says some bullshit conspiracy theory about being charged in the us, and fucks off to Britain. He isn?t some kind vigilante freedom fighter, the guy just did something illegal and seems to think he?s above the law. Sweden has said explicitly that if he gets taken there they won?t send him to the US. If he?s innocent of sexual assault, then he should fucking go in a court and prove it.

Now all of you may agree with me (probably not?). But the guy gets celebrity endorsements, supporters in anonymous masks outside the embassy, and the help of Ecuador (who are fucking idiots by the way.) I don?t understand at all.

So yeah. Wikileaks is great. Julian Assange is a prick.

First of all, can we all stop with this 'sexual assault' nonsense, I've even heard people calling him a rapist. His 'crime' was not wearing a bloody condom during sex, which may or may not be even be true. He didn't do anything illegal, he isn't even being charged with a crime! He's wanted for "questioning".

Sweden has NOT said explicitly they wouldn't send him to America, in fact that was the entire reason he seeked assylum.
They wanted him for questioning which he was more than up for. He told Sweden he would only come over on the condition they promised not to send him to America, guess what? Sweden refused to make that promise.
He asked if they could just do the questioning over the internet, using a webcam. Guess what? Sweden refused that as well.
He told them to send officials over to him in London to do the questioning there instead. Guess what? Sweden refused.

Now, if it really is just questioning they want, it seems awful weird that they A.)Won't make the promise not to extradite him to America B.)Can't do the "questioning" anywhere else but over in Sweden

You can't extradite someone over a mere accusation! You need proof, and strangely enough there is none. What he's being accused of isn't even a bloody crime. Yet there are people out there who are calling him a rapist and a terrorist. America calls him one of the most dangerous terrorist in the world and Fox News is calling for his death!! I'd be seeking assylum too if I were Assange.


EDIT: Just to put this into perspective, the whole thing was so freaking ridiculous that Sweden even dropped the charges. He then releases some stuff on wikileaks and whaddya know!! Sweden suddenly wants him for "questioning" on the dropped charges

 

[Signa]

Never heard of him, but looking at it he hasn't assaulted shit. [if were given all the facts on the case]

Personally, I'm fucking sick of my government's "Team America, FUCK YEAH!" mantra. I'm glad for Julian. Yeah, he conducts himself in a dickish way, but the government's outrage at him just showed how awful the people I'm living under are. There is no justice in them, just revenge.

Death Penalty in a nutshell, really stupid revenge. The best revenge for would be for him to rot in prison.

Which is ironically what is happening to him. He has to stay in disguise and hiding if he doesn't want to die.


I read a ton of the cables when they came out. Nothing I ever read was even close to that big of a deal. What was the big deal was hearing the things our "enlightened" government thought about the leak. Hillary Clinton said something that grated on me (I can't remember details anymore), and I remember some governor, I think it was Delaware, or in that zone, saying that he wants Julian's head. So barbaric.

Bradley Manning's case is a sad one too. Last I heard, he was in solitary for no real reason, and they took away anything they could from him, even his glasses. He wasn't even tried or convicted yet, and still they were punishing him to the best of their abilities.

 

[TheNarrator]

To all the people saying that leaking government information is a crime: yes, it's a crime, but it was in many cases not immoral. What your government did was nothing short of war crimes. I mean, did you even watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0? I'm not saying that everything he did was justified, but it actually is kind of heroic to risk your freedom to fight injustice. You can call him an asshole, I don't know enough about him to confirm or deny that, but it's ridiculous to call him a coward or an ordinary criminal.

 

[Ledan]

He should go to court to face the allegations, no matter if he believes that he is innocent or guilty. He has been accused, so lets sort this thing out.
As for the whole extradition thing, pretty much all European countries have an extradition policy with the US. He is no more in danger in Sweden than he is in the UK or anywhere else in Europe.

 

[matrix3509]

I love how people here call Assange a coward when they themselves would do the EXACT same things in his position.

Given the choice of going to court in Sweden and having them buckle to pressure from the U.S. government to be tried in a U.S. military court, or fleeing, I am sure as hell fleeing. Might I point out, that pretty much every 1st world country has buckled to American pressure at one point or another. The U.S. government doesn't play by the rules, they change the rules whenever it suits them. The whole Megaupload thing should have fucking clued you people in.

 

[Therumancer]

Julian Assange is a prick. First of all, the guy sexually assaults two women, then he says some bullshit conspiracy theory about being charged in the us, and fucks off to Britain. He isn?t some kind vigilante freedom fighter, the guy just did something illegal and seems to think he?s above the law. Sweden has said explicitly that if he gets taken there they won?t send him to the US. If he?s innocent of sexual assault, then he should fucking go in a court and prove it.

Now all of you may agree with me (probably not?). But the guy gets celebrity endorsements, supporters in anonymous masks outside the embassy, and the help of Ecuador (who are fucking idiots by the way.) I don?t understand at all.

So yeah. Wikileaks is great. Julian Assange is a prick.

Well, my basic opinion is that Wikileaks and Julian are both problems. My big issue with them is that they tend to release classified data, things like the personal notes and covert opinions of diplomats. What's more the site seems to be pretty much biased against the major Western powers in terms of what information it releases and when. I don't mind crusading journalists and such, but when it comes to some of the information he's obtained and put up I think he's crossed too many lines. Honestly a lot of what he's done borders on treason against a number of nations, and I suppose I can see why he's avoiding prosecution, while I doubt it would happen some of the stuff he's released could arguably get him a death penelty (though this is a long debate I won't get into, there are things that freedom of the press and freedom of speech do not cover). That's before you get into the sexual assault charges that I figure go with him feeling untouchable, I mean if you can release some of the stuff he has the way he has, and potentially put millions of lives in danger, what's a bit of sexual assault?

I'm increasingly of the opinion that the US needs to stop respecting a lot of these territorial agreements for asylum given how they are being used, to be honest I don't much care about damaging relations with nations that might shield someone like this, because a nation willing to do that isn't worthwhile anyway.

I'll also say that having looked at cases like this, and Kim Dotcom (which someone else mentioned) I think a big part of the problem is that very wealthy individuals, or those with something to trade, can buy politicians outright, and use them to pretty much screw with the extradition process. Sure the US might give a lot to some of these nations, but politicians who are being directly given thousands or millions of dollars to use their authority can be a big obstacle. From the way it looked to me Kim Dotcom for example was pretty much paying New Zealand under the table for shelter, leading to the need to concoct reasons to justify getting him that went beyond belief, when we should have just kicked the door down. If Sweden provides Assange asylum (I've heard mixed things about them doing so) I don't think we should even play that game this time and just do what we need to do.

.. and again, yes I know many will disagree with all, or most of this.

 

[EHKOS]

Please, the US pinned the sexual assault on him, I have no doubt he's innocent, it came out of nowhere. America is just butt hurt and wants to make an example of him.

 

[chadachada123]

Julian Assange is a prick. First of all, the guy sexually assaults two women, then he says some bullshit conspiracy theory about being charged in the us, and fucks off to Britain. He isn?t some kind vigilante freedom fighter, the guy just did something illegal and seems to think he?s above the law. Sweden has said explicitly that if he gets taken there they won?t send him to the US. If he?s innocent of sexual assault, then he should fucking go in a court and prove it.

Now all of you may agree with me (probably not?). But the guy gets celebrity endorsements, supporters in anonymous masks outside the embassy, and the help of Ecuador (who are fucking idiots by the way.) I don?t understand at all.

So yeah. Wikileaks is great. Julian Assange is a prick.

He hasn't even been formally charged. He's being extradited just for them to INTERVIEW HIM. If it was any other random person, this would be a gross civil rights abuse. But because he's a celebrity, it's okay to extradite someone on the possibility of sexual assault?

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

The case was dropped because the alleged victims withdrew their claim. He only fled because Sweden will send him to America. If the Swedes were at all interested in figuring out exactly what happened, and nothing else, they would accept the offer to interview him in the embassy.

 

[Spitfire]

I'm increasingly of the opinion that the US needs to stop respecting a lot of these territorial agreements for asylum given how they are being used, to be honest I don't much care about damaging relations with nations that might shield someone like this, because a nation willing to do that isn't worthwhile anyway.

From the way it looked to me Kim Dotcom for example was pretty much paying New Zealand under the table for shelter, leading to the need to concoct reasons to justify getting him that went beyond belief, when we should have just kicked the door down. If Sweden provides Assange asylum (I've heard mixed things about them doing so) I don't think we should even play that game this time and just do what we need to do.

I sincerely hope you're being sarcastic about all of this.

 

[loa]

Don't you think that the high ups in the U.S. could convict him of rape whether he did it or not if it is in their interest (spoiler: it is)?
Did that never occur to you?