Skip to main content

View Diary: Bill Keller Says: Why wait? Let's Go On Syria (This Time I Know I'm Right) (30 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  On point one. (0+ / 0-)

    Are you seriously arguing that Assange and everyone else is being paranoid about him being taken in by our government? Have you been awake the last few years?

    For number two. I believe the judiciary has already ruled that basically its up to the government to decide.

    •  No, the Judiciary has *not* already ruled. (0+ / 0-)

      There has been no request.  A judiciary cannot take up a nonexistant request, much less rule on it.  Let me reiterate: There has been no request.  You are mandating a legal absurdity, flatly banned by Swedish law, as a precondition for him having to deign to stand trail for raping a girl.  Great that you think so much of rape that a person doesn't even have to stand trial if they so much as suggest that the country that they themself chose as having the best judicial system in the world is really just setting him up as part of a secret nonsensical conspiracy.

      Assange's paranoia about what the US may or may not do has nothing to do with whether he needs to stand trial for a felony.  "Some third party wants to get me" is not, should not be, and has never been a get-out-having-to-stand-trial-for-rape card.  And as stated,  he himself chose Sweden as the country with the world's best whistleblower protections and from which it's hardest to extradite from.  Do you not remember why he was in Sweden?  He was applying for a residence permit there and moving Wikileaks' base of operations there (after alienating a large chunk of his team in Iceland, FYI).  Called Sweden his "shield" because their laws and judicial system were so good.    This is a country where it's even illegal to investigate who leaked something, let alone prosecute them for it, and who - according to Wikileaks itself - outright had their special forces disguise themselves as airport workers to seize a CIA plane to stop the US extradition program from going through their airspace, causing an international diplomatic rift with the US.

      And again, the whole concept is an absurdity.  Lets see if I've got the Shadowy CIA Conspiracy(TM) down pat.  For reasons only beknownst to them, they can only nab Assange from Sweden, not the the UK or any of the vast numbers of far-easier countries that Assange regularly globetrots to.  No, it has to be Sweden.  Let's just take that as a given for some Unknown Shadowy CIA Reason.  Now, Assange was applying to live in Sweden when the Shadowy CIA Conspiracy decided, "Instead of waiting until we're ready to nab him for our charges, since he's planning to live here, wouldn't it be so much more fun to frame him for rape?  Let's not only do that, but let's frame him for rape but use a case that involves the women having consented to certain acts but not others, have there be delays and other actions that could potentially hurt their case, etc, just like in real rape situations, where victims don't live their lives as though they're about to be judged in a trial, instead of a phony "knife to the throat" hollywood-style rape case." Why?  Because the Shadowy CIA Conspiracy just rolls that way.  So we'll activate our secret sleeper agent, Agent SW, who we've been cultivating as a low-level Swedish museum worker living a low-key life in Sweden for the past several decades, because hey, our CIA psychics foresaw this opportunity decades ago and knew that a low-level Swedish museum worker was just what we would some day need!  And of course all of her friends from multiple countries who testify, they're really secret agents too.   Now, let's install our CIA Plant, Ms. Ny, to prosecute him - because of course, we at the CIA have infiltrated the top levels of all of the major governments' of the world's judicial systems just for this purpose.  But let's have her take several weeks to do so, and let's let the news totally leak out during the time that they're getting ready to arrest him so that Assange can run.  And let's just let him flee the country, and not tell Sweden so that they can stop him.  And then when he flees in Britain, let's not tell anyone or stop him and just let him walk into an embassy in violation of his bail terms.  Muahaha!

      Is this how it went down, in your mind?  Great job, Shadowy CIA Conspiracy. Who's heading the CIA these days, Bozo the Clown?

      It would be hard to design a more difficult extradition scenario than to extradite Assange from Sweden under an EAW.  It would require the approval of two national governments (UK and Sweden) and three court systems (UK, Sweden, and ECHR) - any one of those five bodies on its own could derail it.  All five are banned from extradition without binding legal assurances of no death penalty, abuse, and other such conditions.  Sweden additionally cannot extradite for intelligence or military crimes.  The ECHR exists solely to prevent political prosecutions and human rights abuses - that's its only job, and one that it's often accused of overenforcing.

      Even though the UK approval would be easier than the Swedish approval due to their more leniant treaty (which raises the question, why not just extradite him from the UK?) just that alone would be essentially impossible.  Look at the Abu Hamza case.  He was arrested in the UK in 2004 for trying to set up terrorist training camps inside the US and was only extradited a couple weeks ago; it was that difficult.   He only had the UK to block extradition (Assange would have both the UK and Sweden).  He had no get-out-of-extradition-free card for being charged with intelligence crimes and no grounds whatsoever to argue for political persecution.  He had no hundreds of millions of fans around the world.  No millions of dollars for his defense (just last year alone Assange basically robbed a book publisher for half a million pounds... which I suppose is better than when he tried to blackmail Amnesty for 700k).  No massive amounts of pro-bono work, people putting up sureties, etc. And on and on.  To repeat, Hamza was arrested for plotting to set up terrorist training camps inside the US, and it took eight years to extradite him.  The US had to promise in writing no death penalty, no abuse of any kind, even had to promise that they wouldn't send him to a supermax prison, like ordinary US criminals get!  And we're supposed to worry about Julian F'in Assange?   Heck, the UK just refused the extradition of the foremost hacker against US military systems in history because he "has aspergers" (as if Julian "I have to wear specific jackets when writing specific types of letters" Assange doesn't?) - and you think the US didn't really want him?  And this was after the US made all sorts of bend-over-backward promises about his conditions.

      Oh but hey, that was just the UK.  What about Sweden?  They're so evil and corrupt that the World Justice Project (which uses a peer-reviewed methodology to rank judicial systems from around the world; there are over 17 experts just for Sweden alone) ranks it the best in the world in terms of fundamental rights, and their biggest weakness is letting criminals off too easily.  But never mind that, because there was a single incident twelve years ago involving two people who had no legal right to be in the country (versus Assange who has no legal right to not be in the country) and who had been misidentified as convicted terrorists being extradited, that means that the whole country is evil and corrupt and just loves to extradite people, right?

      In the past 50 years, Sweden has not once extradited a person to the US for intelligence or military-related crimes.  It is ILLEGAL in Sweden to do so.  On the contrary, Sweden has granted residence to 430 US military deserters.  Here's a name for you to look up: Edward Lee Howard.  He was a CIA defector.  The US tried very hard to get him extradited and completely and utterly failed.  The prime minister of Sweden at the time?  The very same Carl Bildt who's now foreign minister, the main target of Assange's conspiracies, who Assange is trying to spin as a "US embassy informant".

      Beyond all this, you're supporting him fleeing some serious f'ing charges.  And as much as the echo chamber tries to spin it as a giant conspiracy by spreading fiction made 90% up out of thin air (the laundry list of falsehoods could fill a novel), here's all you need to know to sum it up: Two separate Swedish courts have heard all the evidence already and ruled against Assange, one being the Swedish Supreme Court.  Oh wait, are they in on the conspiracy too?  Man, this conspiracy is everywhere!

      All of this is more than in line with his history (and that link is only the tip of the iceberg - I really should do a whole additional diary).

      But oh no.  You like the guy.  Therefore, he didn't actually rape, and it's all a giant conspiracy against him!  Well, you know what I have to say about that? You are Steubenville.

      •  I havent had time to read through all that (0+ / 0-)

        But I gather you're basically saying "THERE IS NO CONSPIRACY NO CONSPIRACY BLAH BLAH CIA BLAH BLAH BLAH" mixed with "YOU ARE A RAPIST for supporting RAPIST ASSANGE!". Are you fucking serious?

        First of all I immediately corrected my statement about the judge ruling. Check the thread.
        Two, I don't recall at any point suggesting that Assange is innocent of the said sexual offence charges. Please feel free to quote me on that. Unless of course, you are conflating issues and using a strawman to prove your point.

        I don't feel like really arguing more about this issue.  

        •  Nice straw man. (0+ / 0-)

          Seriously, you read that as "YOU ARE A RAPIST for supporting RAPIST ASSANGE"?   No, you are supporting a rape fugitive's run from the law after multiple courts found probable cause that he did, in fact, commit the crime.

          Which is pretty scummy.

          But if it feels better for you to put words in my mouth, go at it, make whatever straw man you want.

          I don't recall at any point suggesting that Assange is innocent of the said sexual offence charges
          Then stop supporting his run from the law and pretending its all a conspiracy against him, plain and simple.

          Famous people rape.  Leftists rape.  People who do good things also sometimes rape.  And Assange has a long and troubling history when it comes to women; it's amazing that it took this long for it to come to this.  You realize that even whistleblowers have made allegations against him?  For example, Heather Brooke, probably the foremost whistleblower in modern UK history, whose accounting scandal exposés led to the resignation of many dozens of MPs, switched from "Assange supporter" to saying of him, "I can not think of a more crazed and irrational person", and described him as "unsettlingly, even bafflingly, unaware of any personal boundaries" after he pressed her up against a wall and tried to make out with her (when she came to discuss Wikileaks with him), knowing she's married.

          And FYI: if you don't like facts, not reading them won't make them go away.  Not reading my post won't make it suddenly be legal to extradite from Sweden, for example.

    •  Or, to put it another way... (0+ / 0-)

      Of the three investigating officers, two believed he was guilty of what would become five counts.  The other believed four.  The first prosecutor, what would become three counts.  The second prosecutor, five.  A judge issued the warrant for all five.  Assange's appeal got a full court hearing by the Svea court of appeals, which ruled probable cause for four.  The Svea supreme court upheld probable cause all four.  The British lower court found that the warrant was legally granted and found no flaws with the Swedish process.  The British high court concurred.  The British Supreme Court concurred.

      But oh no, he has to be innocent and everyone who disagrees must be in on a giant conspiracy, right?  Right?  Because he's Julian "Women's Brains Can't Do Math" Assange, he could never rape!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (130)
  • Community (55)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Culture (30)
  • Environment (26)
  • Republicans (21)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Rescued (18)
  • Media (18)
  • Bernie Sanders (17)
  • Science (17)
  • Education (17)
  • Elections (17)
  • Labor (17)
  • Law (16)
  • GOP (16)
  • Climate Change (15)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Marriage Equality (14)
  • Racism (14)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site