Assange arrested

December 8th, 2010 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

has been arrested in the UK and being held without bail awaiting extradition to Sweden.

My take on Assange and :

  1. The rape and molestation charges are quite clearly bogus. There is significant proof that his sexual relations with the complainants was completely consensual. They are just angry that he was sleeping around. That is pretty scummy behaviour on his part but far from illegal.
  2. Like most, my initial instinct was to wonder how the NSA had managed to get rape charges laid against Assange. But I don’t think one can point the finger at the US Govt. At least one of the complainants is a left-wing politician, who is a most unlikely front for the US military-industrial complex. Her motivations seem personal, not political. She has actually written before about getting revenge on people etc.
  3. Wikileaks in its early days exposed significant wrong doing in multiple countries and was a force for good.
  4. It seems to have become obsessed with the United States, and has somewhat lost the plot.
  5. Exposing the footage of civilian killings in Iraq is arguably justifiable, but publishing tens of thousands of diplomatic cables is not. Revealing what Kevin Rudd said to Hillary Clinton on China could have a disastrous impact on stability in the region.
  6. The nature of the Internet means that Wikileaks will not be closed down. It has hundreds of mirrors.
  7. However it is entirely predictable that companies such as Amazon, Paypal will choose not to provides services to Wikileaks. They have every right to decide not to do so based on their disapproval of what Wikileaks does. Actions have consequences and Wikileaks is no different.
Tags: ,

63 Responses to “Assange arrested”

  1. Jimbob (641 comments) says:

    Someone will dob them in. When the heat goes on, one of the hackers will want to save their own skin.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. tvb (4,324 comments) says:

    I think you have been a little quick to conclude the sex was consensual. The extradition warrant has been acted upon. I think you should suspend your judgement on that one. The leak about Rudd contemplating military action against China is serious. There have been hints that Rudd’s relationship with China is not that good. These and similar comments may have been the cause of that. The US is NOT going to take on China.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Pete George (23,429 comments) says:

    Does all the noise and focus on Assange and Wikileaks mean that the US think they have the leaker (presumed to be Bradley Manning) locked away out of trouble, or are they not wanting to highlight a lack of real culprits?

    There have been hints that Rudd’s relationship with China is not that good.

    There have also been hints that Rudd’s relationship with the US wasn’t very good.

    Cartoon: Welcome to the US…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. TCrwdb (246 comments) says:

    DPF, you are so naive…sheesh…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. davidp (3,576 comments) says:

    My reactions to the diplomatic cables released so far is a big “who cares”. There hasn’t been anything shocking or even particularly surprising. There is a bit of international political gossip, but the internet pretty much has every variety of gossip covered already. There isn’t any intersection between Wikileaks hype and Wikileaks delivery.

    But as you’ve said: “It seems to have become obsessed with the United States, and has somewhat lost the plot”. Assange is an Australian currently resident in the UK. He has decided to target the security of a third country, the US, in a time of war. In my view that makes him a combatant and he should be prepared to face the consequences.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. davidp (3,576 comments) says:

    tvb>The leak about Rudd contemplating military action against China is serious. There have been hints that Rudd’s relationship with China is not that good.

    All that leak reveals is that Rudd is a sad little man who thinks he is much more important and influential than he actually is. Manifesting itself in this case with him “advising” the US on how to interact with China.

    But we already knew all about Rudd’s multiple deficiencies. So what did we learn?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Pete George (23,429 comments) says:

    Would the leaked documents have been circulated without Assange/Wikileaks? They may be a convenient conduit, and a convenient scapegoat, but why are they all the focus? And there’s more to Wikileaks than Assange.

    The Swedish cases are an odd sideshow. The leaked documents have shown how the US can lean on other countries for favourable legal outcomes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. infused (652 comments) says:

    The torrent has been around for ages on certian sites.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. scrubone (3,091 comments) says:

    Agree with your points DPF. As I said several weeks back, the rape charges are simply liberalism biting itself on the backside.

    I love it how he talks about exposing “hard facts” about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Yet, he seems quite unwilling to face the hardest fact of all – that these wars had to be fought. Most people forget that Iraq was doing very badly under the sanctions, and neither was giving Saddam a free hand a good option.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. scrubone (3,091 comments) says:

    Thing is, if he Manned up and faced his accusers he’d be fine. The charges are bogus and he’d be let off. But he insists on pretending it’s some sort of conspiracy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. tvb (4,324 comments) says:

    Except on Iraq Saddam did not have a free hand with the no fly zones which were enforced by the US and Britain. But if you are going to twist America’s tail expect some consequences. Powerful Nations if annoyed can bite HARD.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Pete George (23,429 comments) says:

    “that these wars had to be fought. ”

    They didn’t have to be fought, the US chose to fight them.

    Afghanistan was sort of justified, and the US have seen enough movies to know that they if someone punches them they have to punch back. But even that was a bit of the mark, not many of the 9-11 hijackers were from there.

    Iran was dishonest, illegal and unnecessary (for the US), they wanted to clobber Saddam because that’s what they think they can do.

    NZ knows from experience that if you don’t toe the US military line they can get very hissy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. James Butler (76 comments) says:

    4. It seems to have become obsessed with the United States

    I’m not sure this is fair. WikiLeaks can only distribute what is leaked to them, and it seems reasonable for them to focus their limited resources on releasing the content which a) they have the most of and b) is going to be of most interest. Assange has suggested there is a significant amount of Russian material in the pipeline.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Grant Michael McKenna (1,158 comments) says:

    In Swedish law, his conduct may well amount to rape. Personally, I find the fact that those charges are levelled against an “Icon Of The Left”™ rather amusing, and will find it even more so if the charges succeed. Lawfare against the left. Awesome!
    http://www.thelocal.se/19376/20090511/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. kowtow (8,175 comments) says:

    An interesting contrast between 2 current legal cases in Europe both ostensibly involving that all important principle of freedom of speech.

    Assange and Wilders.

    Assange has leaked secrets that weren’t his to leak(so freedom doesn’t come into it) and stands accused of sexual impropriety. Celebrities,major liberal media outlets , anti Americans and the conspiracy theorists come out in support.

    Wilders speaks the truth about Islam and the dangers of mass immigration and the same types that support Assange are conspicuosly absent or opposed to him !

    Note also how much attention the world’s media give Assange and how little Wilders gets. In the Wilders case they don’t want to draw attention to the fact there are huge problems in Europe.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. slightlyrighty (2,508 comments) says:

    Diplomats say a lot of things in private that they cannot say in public. The irony is, all diplomats know this. The release of diplomatic cables is embarrasing, but in some circles, loss of face is a serious matter, and losing face in public, even more so, which is why diplomatic niceties are so important.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Fletch (6,251 comments) says:

    However it is entirely predictable that companies such as Amazon, Paypal will choose not to provides services to Wikileaks.

    You mean was predictable? Amazon has tossed them off their servers, PayPal will not provide service to them and the same with their American domain name provider.

    Larry Sanger, Wikipedia’s co-founder, said of them in a tweet – “@wikileaks Speaking as Wikipedia’s co-founder, I consider you enemies of the U.S.–not just the government, but the people.”

    As DPF says, they went off the rails. An author on big peace says –

    THE FINAL irony of the WikiLeaks scandal is the cowardice of WikiLeaks that stands at the foundation of the story. Founded in 2006, Wikileaks was supposed to serve the cause of freedom. It claimed that it would defend dissidents in China, the former Soviet Union and other places where human rights remains an empty term. But then China made life difficult for WikiLeaks and so four years later, Assange and his colleagues declared war on the US, rightly assuming that unlike China, the US would take their attacks lying down. Why take risks to defend dissidents in a police state when it’s so much easier and so much more rewarding to attempt to destroy free societies?

    Assange and company are hardly the first to take this course. Human Rights Watch, created to fight for those crushed under the Soviet jackboot, now spends its millions of George Soros dollars to help terrorists in their war against the US and Israel. Amnesty International forgot long ago that it was founded to help prisoners of police states and instead devotes itself to attacking the imaginary evils of the Jewish state and Western democracies.

    Wikileaks is yet another group to go in the same direction. The West is eating itself. Just like in the 1979 revolution in Iran, the leftists will be the first agasint the wall

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. kowtow (8,175 comments) says:

    Pete,you meant Iraq surely.
    And you forget they invaded Kuwait.Iraq II was a conclusion of unfinished business.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. big bruv (13,702 comments) says:

    I do find it amazing that so many hard lefties are rushing to downplay the rape accusations.

    Most of these lefties are brow beaten by their feminazi pals into accepting that any human born with a penis is a rapist yet when one of their own (Assange or Polanski) is charged with sexual crimes they brush it off.

    Can you imagine the screams of outrage if somebody like Lord Monckton was charged with rape?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. JiveKitty (869 comments) says:

    I can use Visa and Mastercard to pay for porn and support anti-abortion fanatics, Prop 8 homophobic bigots, and the Ku Klux Klan. But I can’t use them or PayPal to support Wikileaks, transparency, the First Amendment, and true government reform.

    (http://www.buzzmachine.com/2010/12/07/just-saying/)

    Fair point?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Fletch (6,251 comments) says:

    JiveKitty, yes and no. “Anti-abortion fanatics” is a loaded term for a start. I see nothing wrong with giving money to a group that supports life for all, especially the lives of the unborn. “Prop 8 Homophobic bigots” is also a loaded term. And what about a site like eightmaps which is a mashup with google maps that shows the addresses if Prop 8 donors, who were then hassled at their homes and jobs and which even got them fired? If it were the other way around – showing the homes of homosexuals – there would be a huge uproar.
    Gays are all about tolerance until they come up with someone they don’t agree with, then it’s open war.

    I don’t think there is anything wrong with people raising money to support a bill that is in support of marriage. That is democracy. This doesn’t make them homophobic bigots – and I don’t think much of a person who includes the Klu-Klux Klan in the groups he mentions.

    If people want to donate money to wikileaks though, it’s almost like supporting terrorism against their own country, much like Muslim “charities” in the US who then send the money overseas to Hamas etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. ephemera (564 comments) says:

    @DPF

    The NSA concerns itself with decryption and codebreaking. While I’m sure they have some project or other to do with WikiLeaks, arranging rape charges would not be it.

    Perhaps the CIA? That would be the correct government agency to cite.

    The NSA always appears erroneously in Hollywood thrillers, but its real-life remit is actually very narrow and humdrum. Its employees are all mathematicians and cryptologists.

    Also, I am unsure if wikileaks is obsessed with the United States. it might be fairer to say that the United States has become obsessed with it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    I’m not sure this is fair. WikiLeaks can only distribute what is leaked to them, and it seems reasonable for them to focus their limited resources on releasing the content which a) they have the most of and b) is going to be of most interest. Assange has suggested there is a significant amount of Russian material in the pipeline.

    The next ‘megaleak’ sounds like Bank of America: http://www.cnbc.com/id/40548531. There are corporations too, but can’t remember them off the top of my head.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    “Anti-abortion fanatics” is a loaded term for a start.

    Unless there aren’t any anti-abortion fanatics around that you can actually donate to. Every movement has its fringes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. side show bob (3,660 comments) says:

    Surely the horse has bolted, why the continued effort to rein Wiki leaks in. Who controls and how many have the cypher for the good juicy stuff ?. Bet the NSA is having kittens. I’m picking a court case would be the least of Assange’s worries , saw Hillary on the box and she looked seriously pissed, bet a CIA hit squad is dusting off the old sniper rifles.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Mr Magister (420 comments) says:

    More likely he will be ‘found’ hanged in his cell.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Fletch (6,251 comments) says:

    “Anti-abortion fanatics” is a loaded term for a start.

    Unless there aren’t any anti-abortion fanatics around that you can actually donate to. Every movement has its fringes.

    @stephen, that may be right; there are always fringe groups, but the author that Jivekitty quotes points to (under his link for “anti-abortion fanatics”) is National Right For Life, which I don’t think is “fringe”. That he would lump these people in with the KKK shows his bias. As I said, Liberals are very tolerant until they run up against someone they don’t agree with. That is when democracy goes out the window and those who don’t agree with them are smeared and called names. AFter all, there is no way a Liberal could actually be wrong, is there?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. scrubone (3,091 comments) says:

    Afghanistan was sort of justified, and the US have seen enough movies to know that they if someone punches them they have to punch back. But even that was a bit of the mark, not many of the 9-11 hijackers were from there.

    Pete, I always think of you as a sensible person, then you come out with this sort of thing.

    Osama was there. That “not many” of the hijackers came from there is perfectly irrelevant.

    Iran was dishonest, illegal and unnecessary (for the US), they wanted to clobber Saddam because that’s what they think they can do.

    Like I say, hard facts – too hard for some. They wanted to clobber Saddam because it was the right thing to do, even Hillary agreed. What made it illegal? The fact that Saddam had bribed key votes in the UN? If it was so unnecessary, why was Clinton going to do it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Grendel (993 comments) says:

    JiveKitty – actually you cannot pay for porn on Paypal. Paypal made the decision not to allow companies selling ‘adult’ products to use them for taking funds.

    thats the decision of a private company choosing who to do business with. and considering how much money they would make from their clip of the porn ticket, they are happy with the consequences.

    So i see no issue with them wanting nothing to do with Wikileaks. as for the rest of the groups you tried to show as ‘worse’, its up to paypal to decide if they want to let them use the service.

    I have pretty much stayed away from the wikileaks thing. i first noticed them when all the lefties (like boingboing and our local nutters) were raving about them, and if boingboing is for something politically, i am usually against it. funny how they were also utterly opposed to the climate gate emails, which could be argued were leaked the same way as wikileaks.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. JiveKitty (869 comments) says:

    I know I tend to disagree about religion, abortion, etc, but the KKK was the group that caught my eye, to be honest.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. MikeNZ (3,234 comments) says:

    Jivekitty
    Homophobic bigots haha

    So when people of principle stand up and say NO!
    they become homophobes?
    Yeah right.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. JiveKitty (869 comments) says:

    Say “No” all you want, Mike. Don’t engage in homosexual sex yourself. But don’t attempt to regulate the freely made choices of consenting adults. However, that’s my libertarian leaning coming out there: government failure, law of unintended consequences, movement of the Overton window towards acceptability of tyranny, corrupting influence of power upon individuals, danger of government capture by interests, etc.

    Also note that was a quote and the part I found interesting was the KKK.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Magnanomis (138 comments) says:

    The founder of Cryptome calls Wikileaks a business hiding behind narcissistic “public interest” PR http://mail.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/2010-December/002495.html

    Cryptome http://cryptome.org/ has some photo’s of, and commentary on, Assange’s arrest. Cryptome has been around since 1996 and is arguably better than Wikileaks (eg, less US-centric).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Bevan (3,965 comments) says:

    But even that was a bit of the mark, not many of the 9-11 hijackers were from there.

    Irrelevant, the Taliban regime in Afghanistan was providing refuge for Osama bin Laden and Al Qeada. They allowed them to set up terrorist training camps, and defended their actions after the attacks.

    Iran was dishonest, illegal and unnecessary (for the US), they wanted to clobber Saddam because that’s what they think they can do.

    Depends – do you think Saddam had the right to fire SAM at the US & UK jets enforcing the UN mandated no-fly zone? DO you think Saddam had the right to bomb the Kurd’s and Shiite’s?

    My only issue with the invasion is that they used such a narrow justification. They should have just said – the guys a complete asshat and we can’t be fucked being the only two countries enforcing the UN mandated no fly zones. Either the rest of you step the fuck up and help, or we are taking the bastard out.

    NZ knows from experience that if you don’t toe the US military line they can get very hissy.

    How would you feel if the RNZN sent the Te Mana to Japan for a port visit only to be humiliatingly denied entry?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. kowtow (8,175 comments) says:

    Jivekitty.

    This might not be the right thread but oppositon to Proposition 8 is a homosexual attempt to overturn thousands of years of tradition and have the state recognise that marriage is no longer what it always was.This will go all the way to the US supreme court.It’s not about homosexual activity it is about the institution of marriage.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. unaha-closp (1,157 comments) says:

    But even that was a bit of the mark, not many of the 9-11 hijackers were from there.

    The bulk of the hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, Osama bin Laden comes from Saudi Arabia, the bulk of funding for Al Qaeda (according to the USA via leaked docs off Wikileaks) comes from Gulf Arab states of which the largest is Saudi Arabia, the religious justification for the branch of Sunni Salafist Islam that Al Qaeda uses is derived from scholarship funded by Saudi Arabia. Iraq was next door to the mark, not much off.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. JiveKitty (869 comments) says:

    O/T

    @Kowtow: I think I vaguely recall polygamy in the O/T and I don’t have a problem with the definition of marriage changing over time – as I am fairly sure it has? But, my position on marriage is that government should ONLY act as a registry for marriages in the sense of a contract which creates kinship (amongst other things which I can’t be bothered detailing), and that people should be able to engage in whatever contractual relationship they want (be it homosexual, polygamous, whatever), provided it is consensual and between adults. It would sort the problem of those complaining about government tinkering and it would sort the problem of those complaining that the government is doing the wrong thing. I think it’s a big problem in society that people expect government to interfere and intervene, instead of taking responsibility for themselves and leaving others to also take responsibility for themselves.

    But, as I said, I was quoting and the part that caught my eye was the KKK. I didn’t really pay attention to whatever else was lumped in.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. ben (2,420 comments) says:

    My take on Wikileaks:

    a check on government power == a force for good. If its effect is to throw sand in the cogs of government more the good. According to Friedman the sheer inefficiency of government saves us from it taking even more of the economy.

    Slight caveat: diplomatic instability is scary when it involves volatile powers with nuclear weapons. Here relationships matter.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. JiveKitty (869 comments) says:

    Oops, one O/T meant “Off topic”. The other meant “Old Testament”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Bryla (263 comments) says:

    Thankyou Julian Assange for exposing the rank hypocrisy of the US and other governments in the “war” on “terror”.

    DPF, you are wrong about the “disclosures” causing regional instability. Do you really, really think that China is in any way ignorant about (i) US military adventurism, (ii) Australian acquiescence to US militarism, or (iii) US/Australian force articulation? Come on, the only people being lied to here are us, the poor Anglophone citizens of the US hegemony.

    You Kiwis don’t seem to appreciate that even the tiny distance you’ve opened up away from US dominance has given you a slightly freer, slightly more accountable, and slightly more rational society and government. Enjoy it cobbers.

    p.s. Aren’t prestigious and respected newspapers like the Times also publishing this material. Why haven’t they put put up on charges of, say, schoolboy sodomy? Come on CIA, you’re not trying.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Fletch (6,251 comments) says:

    JiveKitty, I don’t have a problem with people doing what they want in the privacy of their own homes, even if it’s something I disagree with; it’s their choice. What I do have a problem with is gays demanding that their acts be seen as normal and lawful and promoted through a pseudo civil rights movement that demonizes anyone who disagrees with them.
    I also disagree with school children being taught in class that it is normal.

    When the law starts upholding practices that are not natural or moral, I have a problem with that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Pete George (23,429 comments) says:

    “I don’t have a problem with people doing what they want in the privacy of their own homes,”
    “What I do have a problem with is gays demanding that their acts be seen as normal”
    “When the law starts upholding practices that are not natural or moral, I have a problem with that.”

    Your problems seem confused.

    Interesting to see another situation where those that once may have demonised gays now claim to be demonised victims “for disagreeing”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. MyNameIsJack (2,415 comments) says:

    How curious that the only charge against him is a spurious one of a sexual nature, and with a woman, as well. Is that the best the seppos can do?

    Surrely there could be other charges, like foot tapping in a toilet stall, you know, something meaty.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Bevan (3,965 comments) says:

    How curious that the only charge against him is a spurious one of a sexual nature, and with a woman, as well. Is that the best the seppos can do?

    Wait. You mean to tell us that the US managed to get Sweden – a country well known for its neutrality – to trump up some charges against Assange? Then managed to get Interpol (a french based agency) to release a Red Notice for his arrest?

    And even though these are just trumped up charges, he still fled the country……

    Stocked up on tin foil huh?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Jinky (182 comments) says:

    These women hve complained to swedish police because he refused to cover up and leaked indiscriminately while having sex with them!! What were they expecting??

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. cha (3,933 comments) says:

    Assange hit the news in May, the accusations were made in August, he offered to return to Sweden to be interviewed in mid November and the first documents were released ten days later. So why wasn’t he arrested in August Bevan?.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. alex Masterley (1,507 comments) says:

    I have difficulty with the description of the allegations being made against Mr Assange as spurious or trumped up.

    I don’t know how the legal system in Sweden works, and I especially don’t know what the Swedish Criminal Code has to say about sexual offending. What is complained of might well be a serious offence unde the Swedish Criminal Code.

    The Swedes would probably consider parts of our legal system odd as much as we consider theirs to be odd.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. cha (3,933 comments) says:

    But best you put the foil hat on before you read this Counterpunch article.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Kieran_B (81 comments) says:

    “Thing is, if he Manned up and faced his accusers he’d be fine. The charges are bogus and he’d be let off. But he insists on pretending it’s some sort of conspiracy.”

    Assange wasn’t hunted and arrested in Britain, he handed himself into a police station to clear the charges. The British Police were also kept informed of his location and movements while in the country.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Dave Mann (1,203 comments) says:

    I’m amazed at the charges, frankly. Seeing him on TV (in one of those fake current affairs programmes) a few months ago, he looked and spoke like, and had the body language of, a homosexual…. maybe he is a bi – in which case are we to look forward to the rent boys coming out of the woodwork too?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. reid (16,224 comments) says:

    “I don’t know how the legal system in Sweden works, and I especially don’t know what the Swedish Criminal Code has to say about sexual offending.”

    Neither do I Alex but would a defence lawyer have a good argument against rape in most Western countries if the complainants against their client had soon after sent SMS messages about the encounter to their friends, never once mentioning anything except how thrilled and pleased they were with the experience?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. John Gibson (295 comments) says:

    “Once, as she (Anna Ardin) was lecturing, a male student in the audience looked at his notes instead of staring at her. Anna Ardin reported him for sexual harassment because he discriminated against her for being a woman and because she claimed he made use of the male “master suppression technique” in trying to make her feel invisible.” – tie your opponent up in litigation. Similar to the technique used by global warming deniers against academics.

    Would be interesting to know more about the relationship between Anna Ardin & Sofia Wilen.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Magnanomis (138 comments) says:

    “he looked and spoke like, and had the body language of, a homosexual….”

    Assange reminds me of John Inman, who played Mr. Humphries (“I’m free!”) in ‘Are You Being Served?’

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Hurf Durf (2,860 comments) says:

    I couldn’t care less about Assange. I only ask is that when he is found dead of mysterious circumstances the nutcase cultists who fetishise him follow his route.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. reid (16,224 comments) says:

    “I couldn’t care less about Assange.”

    As an individual he’s no more important than anyone else but neither is he less important. It’s what he symbolizes at this point that is relevant.

    My analysis is: Assange is destined to become one of the poster boys for everything that is execrable about the so-called war on terror.

    Many many people round the world believe the war on terror is complete made-up bollocks. It was conceived in haste, has been conducted in haste, is clumsy, ineffective and based on fundamentally flawed premises. Furthermore exactly like the so-called “war on drugs” it is expensive, ineffective, and has no end in sight (e.g. how come OBL hasn’t even ever even come close to being spotted despite the vast vast vast resources being trained against him 24/7/365 for now almost 10 years? Gosh he’s fiendishly clever isn’t he. How long do you think you’d last if you were he even if you were living in the mountains? Surely at least now and then he has to get supplies and you’d think the satellites could track those people walking through wouldn’t you. Perhaps they have lots of rock costumes…).

    Whether or not you yourself believe that about the war on terror, the observable fact is that many many many people throughout the western world and for that matter in all the other hemispheres as well, actually believe that is in fact the case.

    Given that there is no point in disputing whether or not that view is justified on given “facts” you care to put before us, the point is, many many many people believe that it is in fact the case, and in politics, it’s belief, not reality that counts.

    The fact the US govt is behaving in the way they are over this matter shows how far they have moved from being the cradle of democracy toward a facist dictatorship, in the eyes of aforesaid people.

    The fact the aforesaid govt clearly doesn’t give a shit about whether or not they are in fact perceived in this light shows how far they have in fact moved from those founding principles of their formerly great nation.

    This case is a harbinger. If he gets taken out of play, others will pop up. Then more and more and more. This won’t stop. It’s not the Assanges of this world who will finally stop this complete and utter bullshit but they’re the canaries in the mine.

    For the reef fish of course. One assumes those on this blog have known all this for many many years already.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. adze (2,088 comments) says:

    An interesting article on the tactics and philosophy behind Assange/Wikileaks:

    https://zunguzungu.wordpress.com/2010/11/29/julian-assange-and-the-computer-conspiracy-%E2%80%9Cto-destroy-this-invisible-government%E2%80%9D/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    Bevan @ 2.33pm said:

    And even though these are just trumped up charges, he still fled the country……

    More crap from the ignorati.

    He didn’t flee Sweden. He asked for and was granted permission to leave. At all times the Swedish and British police knew exactly where he was. There was no manhunt, regardless of what the fundamentalist fanatics who disseminate what passes for news in the USA, eg Bill O’Reilly, say. Interpol’s role was a side show orchestrated by the US. FFS, how often does Interpol do a “Most Wanted” on a disagreement about condom use?

    And for some deluded posters above, let me say this: none of the 9/11 hijackers ever spent time in Afghanistan, let alone with Bin Laden. The plot was hatched in Hamburg.

    Why wasn’t Hamburg bombed?

    I suggest you all read his op-ed in The Australian today. Do your own fucking search for it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    Assange will be prosecuted under espionage laws.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    But they will need to rush through a law change to do that.

    I think the pressure will overwhelm even the US.

    Obama has already shown has weak he is.

    But I don’t think Bradley Manning will ever step outside of a prison while he breathes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    Anyway, what sort of sanctimonious shit is this from DPF:

    Revealing what Kevin Rudd said to Hillary Clinton on China could have a disastrous impact on stability in the region.

    Which region, pray tell?

    Do you mean China, US or Australia? Or, understanding how you think, Antarctica?

    All the cable reveals is what an idiot Rudd is.

    You should go out for a drink with him – kindred souls and all that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Bevan (3,965 comments) says:

    Luc, do you realise that you just made three posts containing little more relevance than Phil Goff? Serously you just refuted debate topics, with little more than your blinkered opinion.

    Mind you, I shouldn’t expect substance from one of your posts.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. dandy (26 comments) says:

    Obsessed with the US?

    I think that’s unlikely, more likely that the US is a leaky boat with many willing to disclose ‘secret’ documents.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Magnanomis (138 comments) says:

    The US Congressional Research Service (analogous to Parliamentary research units) doubts that Wikileaks can be prosecuted under US law for acquiring or publishing US diplomatic cables. But the CRS cannot give a definitive answer because it is prohibited from viewing the cables.

    http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

    What remedies are left to the US if they really want to ‘get’ Assange? – extraordinary rendition, a drone attack, etc.

    Wikileaks apparently next plans to release the documents relating to an American financial institution (possibly the Bank of America, whose share price has plummeted on the speculation). There should be juicy revelations on the credit crunch.

    “The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community” – Carl Jung

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.