I hope he makes it to Ecuador, where journalists are never put on trial in kangaroo courts by the government for criticizing the El Presidente.
Given that sweden has been complicit in US extraordinary rendition programs, arguments revolving around the "justice system" are rather ineffective.
Why doesn't he go somewhere like Switzerland? Where they're neutral? Or Russia- will extraditation takes forever?
I haven't been following this too closely. However painting the US as a boogeyman that will put Assange to death reminded me of a video I watched recently. Basically, three British businessmen committed wire fraud and were going to be prosecuted in the US. They hired a PR firm that weaved a story of how badly they would be treated by the US justice system. The PR firm's claims, that were repeated by a gullible media, were outright fabrications. Assange's fear could be justified, but I wonder if he is trying the same tactic. <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/x_1QvhJQAyo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Shall we ask Bradley Manning? Assange is not claiming that he would be put to death in the US. However, given the now-normal US practice of secret accusations + secret trial + secret detention he is rightly worried. Finally, if Assange was being accused of committing a financial crime, Obama would probably send him a cheque rather than put him on trial.
More ridiculous anti-U.S. propaganda from Mathloom (who works for a dictatorship in which human rights are systematically abused).
What Manning and Assange did are completely different cases. There are many examples of the press revealing government secrets. They do not get prosecuted, except for contempt of court for not revealing their sources. In Assange's case, the Wikileaks system is set up so that he does not know the sources of the leaks. Manning did commit a crime and probably several different crimes. Plus he is in the military which has a completely different and often more harsh justice system. This is similar to the role of Robert Novak and Scooter Libby in the Valerie Plame outing. Novak, who reported the the story, was not charged with any crimes. Libby, who leaked the secret, was charged and convicted of a crime.
Agreed they are different, but similar lessons can be drawn. It's quite clear that the punishment barometer depends on how much corruption in the powerful elite circle is unveiled (being in the military would worsen things too, as you said). When a leak makes the people in charge look good, nothing really happens. Wikileaks is, however, the most significant such leak probably in recent history so one should expect that the punishment will match the significance. Finally, it's not very reflective to call this illegal. Assange's actions are illegal according to the laws created by those who he considers corrupt in some way. It's like me punishing someone for breaking my house rule of "no going through my things" after, for example, they found an f-load of dead corpses in my garage. My legitimacy and eligibility to administer/enforce "House Rules" becomes a joke in this scenario. For all we know, the implicated governments may be engaging in far more human rights abuses and breaches of international and national laws than we imagine, so much so that it dwarfs the leaking of the documents. The way things are set up (pretty much everywhere) there is too much power to arbitrarily label something a national security secret issue and this poses a major risk for citizens, the state and sometimes even the world. I can understand the need for these controls, but I simultaneously feel that in the absence of any "counter controls" to ensure propriety, such actions are probably more beneficial than detrimental to the overwhelming majority of the population of the world.
Apologies for not reading the entire thread, but he's not being accused of "rape" in the sense any of us would recognize the term. Sweden has laws that classify as "molestation" sexual intercourse under false pretenses. He's being accused by an ex-girlfriend of lying to her about there not being another woman. He's also being accused of having condoms break twice during sex. Sweden refers to these as "molestations." The US media are covering up the specifics of the charges so as to sensationalize them, our media complicit in the US right-wing warmongering. Wikileaks is Pentagon Papers 2, and Assange owwn the moral high ground here just as Ellsberg did.
Like the UAE government: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/05/wikileaks-cables-saudi-terrorist-funding WikiLeaks cables portray Saudi Arabia as a cash machine for terrorists Saudi Arabia is the world's largest source of funds for Islamist militant groups such as the Afghan Taliban and Lashkar-e-Taiba – but the Saudi government is reluctant to stem the flow of money, according to Hillary Clinton. (...) Three other Arab countries are listed as sources of militant money: Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. The cables highlight an often ignored factor in the Pakistani and Afghan conflicts: that the violence is partly bankrolled by rich, conservative donors across the Arabian Sea whose governments do little to stop them. ---------------------- By the way, WikiLeaks is blocked in the UAE. So while Mathloom is lecturing here from a high horse, the government he works for BLOCKS WikiLeaks - while being involved in terrorist funding.
For general info, it's not blocked, I can even access it at work where we have extra filters. If it's really important for whatever reason to anyone other than ATW, I can send you a screenshot.
Are you willing to take on a bet whether money from the UAE goes into support of fundamentalists in Pakistan and other places?
I thought so. 1) Terrorism Financing happens in every country. You best do some reading before going around betting with people about it. 2) If you want to man up and bet on whether wikileaks is blocked or not (as you claimed and posted a link), let me know. Loser stops posting for 3 months starting when the winner decides. I will gladly handle the burden of proving that it is not blocked via a picture of the site open, clearly showing full taskbar to ensure no VPN, with today's paper in the UAE and holding up one specific finger. If you think there is a way around this, let me know and I'm sure we can come up with something. You were so confident with your posts, I'm sure you'll be up for it.
Are you denying that those ideologically close to you are involved in financing proxy wars against the West? Answer: Are the following involved in funding fundamentalist Islamists: - Saudi government - UAE government - Rich Saudi families - Rich families in the UAE
Meh. I've told you before that my ideology in this respect is anti-war and anti-violence unless innocent lives can predictably be saved from immediate death or torture. I know for a fact that the UAE and Saudi governments (i.e. the families which rule them) do not financially fund fundamentalist Islamists to wage proxy wars against the West. Even from a common sense perspective, this would be ridiculous as both governments are allies of the West housing major Western military bases and depending largely on the West's consumption of oil. This is even more ridiculous when you consider that the UAE and Saudi purchase their weapons from the West. Obviously I am not taking up your illogical bet. This is because I know that in every country in the world, some terrorism financing occurs, even if we use the US FATF definition of terrorism financing. Nevermind the fact that you are clearly clueless about this, you are really way out of your league trying to discuss this. The role of AML and CTF authorities is to reduce it as much as possible, but logically speaking no one is able to stop it completely. Do you understand? I am telling you that there are individuals engaged in TF in every country in the world. Note for the future, "Are the following..." is not an answer, it is a question and it should be punctuated with a question mark. I'll assume you're chickening out on your claim. Unless you're willing to back up your claims and take the bet in your next post, it's back to the ignore list for you Mr Hühnerkacke.
