Assange's reason for avoiding extradition to Sweden

[Blackclaw]

Without delving into the validity of the charges against him, I have a question concerning Julian Assange's stated reason for avoiding going to Sweden to face trial. He claims he fears that if he returns to Sweden, he'll be extradited by the US. But he was in London when he took refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy. Great Britain is a close ally of the US. Doesn't Great Britain also have an extradition agreement with the US? Why would he feel safe from US extradition in London but not Sweden? His stated reason for avoiding returning to Sweden to face trial doesn't make sense to me.

Background info and case update:

http://www.theatlantic.com/news/arc...wedish-appeals-court/500315/#article-comments

 

[Trausti]

Don't think he needs to fear extradition to the US. Maybe he really worries about the outcome of a trial in Sweden.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/julian-assange-unlikely-to-face-us-charges-over-publishing-classified-documents/2013/11/25/dd27decc-55f1-11e3-8304-caf30787c0a9_story.html

 

[untermensche]

He does need to fear extradition to the US. That will probably mean enduring the kind of abuses Manning is dealing with.

When whistle blowers are punished that discourages whistle blowing.

It is not a good thing or something anybody should support.

 

[Trausti]

He does need to fear extradition to the US. That will probably mean enduring the kind of abuses Manning is dealing with.

When whistle blowers are punished that discourages whistle blowing.

It is not a good thing or something anybody should support.

Assange isn't a whistle blower. And unlike Manning, Assange had no duty to keep the information secret. It's like publishing the Pentagon Papers.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Without delving into the validity of the charges against him, I have a question concerning Julian Assange's stated reason for avoiding going to Sweden to face trial. He claims he fears that if he returns to Sweden, he'll be extradited by the US. But he was in London when he took refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy. Great Britain is a close ally of the US. Doesn't Great Britain also have an extradition agreement with the US? Why would he feel safe from US extradition in London but not Sweden? His stated reason for avoiding returning to Sweden to face trial doesn't make sense to me.

Background info and case update:

http://www.theatlantic.com/news/arc...wedish-appeals-court/500315/#article-comments

He wasn't in London, he was in Ecuador. Embassies are considered part of the country they represent, not part of the country their buildings are in. That's why he couldn't leave the embassy - if he did the British police would arrest him and send him back to the US.

 

[untermensche]

He does need to fear extradition to the US. That will probably mean enduring the kind of abuses Manning is dealing with.

When whistle blowers are punished that discourages whistle blowing.

It is not a good thing or something anybody should support.

Assange isn't a whistle blower. And unlike Manning, Assange had no duty to keep the information secret. It's like publishing the Pentagon Papers.

It IS like the publishing of the Pentagon Papers.

Exposing crimes and lies of the US government should never be a crime in itself.

 

[Blackclaw]

Without delving into the validity of the charges against him, I have a question concerning Julian Assange's stated reason for avoiding going to Sweden to face trial. He claims he fears that if he returns to Sweden, he'll be extradited by the US. But he was in London when he took refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy. Great Britain is a close ally of the US. Doesn't Great Britain also have an extradition agreement with the US? Why would he feel safe from US extradition in London but not Sweden? His stated reason for avoiding returning to Sweden to face trial doesn't make sense to me.

Background info and case update:

http://www.theatlantic.com/news/arc...wedish-appeals-court/500315/#article-comments

He wasn't in London, he was in Ecuador. Embassies are considered part of the country they represent, not part of the country their buildings are in. That's why he couldn't leave the embassy - if he did the British police would arrest him and send him back to the US.

But before he went into the embassy, he was in London. He travelled there while out on bail. It just confuses me as to where he'd travel to a country like the United Kingdom in the first place instead of travelling to a country that had no extradition treaty with the US at all. Why not go to the actual country of Ecuador instead of risking being grabbed at the airport in London just to go hide in an embassy? Less risk and more leg room once there.

 

[Valjean]

If he tried to jump bail and leave London, wouldn't he have been arrested and held in jail?

 

[Blackclaw]

If he tried to jump bail and leave London, wouldn't he have been arrested and held in jail?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the timeline, but I thought he was in Sweden when he made bail. So he didn't have to go to London at all. That's what I don't understand. Why go to an ally of the US if you fear the US? Why not flee to Venezuela or some other nation that would be happy to thumb their nose at the US? (Well, no one would flee to Venezuela now, but back when this started Venezuela was still holding together.)

 

[Trausti]

Assange isn't a whistle blower. And unlike Manning, Assange had no duty to keep the information secret. It's like publishing the Pentagon Papers.

It IS like the publishing of the Pentagon Papers.

Exposing crimes and lies of the US government should never be a crime in itself.

No one at the New York Times risked arrest by publishing them. That's the point.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

He wasn't in London, he was in Ecuador. Embassies are considered part of the country they represent, not part of the country their buildings are in. That's why he couldn't leave the embassy - if he did the British police would arrest him and send him back to the US.

But before he went into the embassy, he was in London. He travelled there while out on bail. It just confuses me as to where he'd travel to a country like the United Kingdom in the first place instead of travelling to a country that had no extradition treaty with the US at all. Why not go to the actual country of Ecuador instead of risking being grabbed at the airport in London just to go hide in an embassy? Less risk and more leg room once there.

He didn't travel to London while out on bail, he was arrested while in London and granted bail there while waiting for the British judge to extradite him to Sweden to face the rape charges. He then jumped bail by going into the Ecuadoran embassy and requesting asylum. The British court ruled to extradite him, but they can't touch him while he's inside the embassy. If he ever leaves, the police will arrest him and immediately ship him off to Sweden. At that point, he'll quickly be sent to the US to have electrodes attached to his nuts in the name of freedom.

 

[arkirk]

It IS like the publishing of the Pentagon Papers.

Exposing crimes and lies of the US government should never be a crime in itself.

No one at the New York Times risked arrest by publishing them. That's the point.

Did you pay attention to the Manning trial? You actually could not. It was full of restrictions on public access. National Security...the broad blanket used to squelch any and all opposition to our government. Nobody seems to get it. According to the Bible, what did Adam and Eve do to get their asses tossed out of Eden? Knowledge of good and evil...not being evil...just knowing about it. We are prohibited knowing about the evil our country does in our name. Why do we keep accepting this notion of unknowable information being classified and kept from us? We are the only country in the world with 900 military bases scattered all around the world. We export most of the weapons that appear in these conflicts world wide. The classification system is something that only evil people accept...and they only want it for themselves. We have serious problems and the entire world should know about them and we have no business accepting stonewalling by our government or for that matter any other government. The problem is one of most of the nations of the world being ruled by bullies and thugs that start by making what ought to be a public government PRIVATE. This entire issue is one of SECRET PRIVATIZATION OF GOVERNMENT.

It makes a mockery of our democracy....it is clear that we are being ruled by terrorists, assassins, and full scale war mongers. The two candidates for president both brag about how they will use the military. Assange is a victim of our system without being a citizen of the U.S. This is the case with most of our victims. The Palestinians are victims of the American surrogate in Palestine. A country that lives by the sword dies by the sword. Wake up. Get on board with a gentler more diplomatic and less violent form of leadership...or you will see our country die...either in violent acts or merely the slow death of massive poverty. There is nothing inherent in America to keep it from becoming like Argentina or perhaps Chili or El Salvador or Guatemala. Our wholly inadequate constitution has been stripped away by greedy corporate interests and is almost non existent today. What do you think Wikileaks was about? More information...what we need. We don't need Manning in Jail. There are hundreds of bankers that belong there instead.

The way the Swedes have hemmed and hawed about not charging him but still wanting him extradited gives away the true nature of their case...no case...just get him into custody. The U.S. I am sure has some sort of sealed indictment against Assange for espionage. That has been their pattern for a long time...(since Woodrow Wilson), though today it also has a far more sophisticated web of legalities it can use and I am sure that once Assange got to Sweden he would be cleared of sexual assault and promptly extradited to the U.S. In the event the Swedes dropped their case the Brits would do the job for the U.S. anyway. I do not believe that Manning was guilty of much. The government was sloppy and at the same time corrupt and inhuman. So what if Manning exposed some of that? I don't want my country threatening the rest of the world constantly. So what if Manning broke up spying activity or activity to destroy other nations. I don't want my country involved is wars of aggression. We need to cooperate and deal with worldwide concerns like global warming, pollution, and poverty. War makes dealing with our truly serious problems impossible.

 

[Trausti]

No one at the New York Times risked arrest by publishing them. That's the point.

Did you pay attention to the Manning trial? You actually could not. It was full of restrictions on public access. National Security...the broad blanket used to squelch any and all opposition to our government. Nobody seems to get it. According to the Bible, what did Adam and Eve do to get their asses tossed out of Eden? Knowledge of good and evil...not being evil...just knowing about it. We are prohibited knowing about the evil our country does in our name. Why do we keep accepting this notion of unknowable information being classified and kept from us? We are the only country in the world with 900 military bases scattered all around the world. We export most of the weapons that appear in these conflicts world wide. The classification system is something that only evil people accept...and they only want it for themselves. We have serious problems and the entire world should know about them and we have no business accepting stonewalling by our government or for that matter any other government. The problem is one of most of the nations of the world being ruled by bullies and thugs that start by making what ought to be a public government PRIVATE. This entire issue is one of SECRET PRIVATIZATION OF GOVERNMENT.

It makes a mockery of our democracy....it is clear that we are being ruled by terrorists, assassins, and full scale war mongers. The two candidates for president both brag about how they will use the military. Assange is a victim of our system without being a citizen of the U.S. This is the case with most of our victims. The Palestinians are victims of the American surrogate in Palestine. A country that lives by the sword dies by the sword. Wake up. Get on board with a gentler more diplomatic and less violent form of leadership...or you will see our country die...either in violent acts or merely the slow death of massive poverty. There is nothing inherent in America to keep it from becoming like Argentina or perhaps Chili or El Salvador or Guatemala. Our wholly inadequate constitution has been stripped away by greedy corporate interests and is almost non existent today. What do you think Wikileaks was about? More information...what we need. We don't need Manning in Jail. There are hundreds of bankers that belong there instead.

Manning had a duty to kept information secure. Unless Assange conspired with Manning to get the information, he has done no crime. That's why there's isn't a risk of extradition (expect the risk imagined by loonies).

 

[arkirk]

Did you pay attention to the Manning trial? You actually could not. It was full of restrictions on public access. National Security...the broad blanket used to squelch any and all opposition to our government. Nobody seems to get it. According to the Bible, what did Adam and Eve do to get their asses tossed out of Eden? Knowledge of good and evil...not being evil...just knowing about it. We are prohibited knowing about the evil our country does in our name. Why do we keep accepting this notion of unknowable information being classified and kept from us? We are the only country in the world with 900 military bases scattered all around the world. We export most of the weapons that appear in these conflicts world wide. The classification system is something that only evil people accept...and they only want it for themselves. We have serious problems and the entire world should know about them and we have no business accepting stonewalling by our government or for that matter any other government. The problem is one of most of the nations of the world being ruled by bullies and thugs that start by making what ought to be a public government PRIVATE. This entire issue is one of SECRET PRIVATIZATION OF GOVERNMENT.

It makes a mockery of our democracy....it is clear that we are being ruled by terrorists, assassins, and full scale war mongers. The two candidates for president both brag about how they will use the military. Assange is a victim of our system without being a citizen of the U.S. This is the case with most of our victims. The Palestinians are victims of the American surrogate in Palestine. A country that lives by the sword dies by the sword. Wake up. Get on board with a gentler more diplomatic and less violent form of leadership...or you will see our country die...either in violent acts or merely the slow death of massive poverty. There is nothing inherent in America to keep it from becoming like Argentina or perhaps Chili or El Salvador or Guatemala. Our wholly inadequate constitution has been stripped away by greedy corporate interests and is almost non existent today. What do you think Wikileaks was about? More information...what we need. We don't need Manning in Jail. There are hundreds of bankers that belong there instead.

Manning had a duty to kept information secure. Unless Assange conspired with Manning to get the information, he has done no crime. That's why there's isn't a risk of extradition (expect the risk imagined by loonies).

You don't seem to understand...anybody who screws with the asshole thugs who waste our future with wars and empire gets the weenie. You really are awfully lame when you can't understand that. We have no interest in technicalities. We torture, we assassinate, we bomb...sometimes just in case there might be something in it for us, and it is really an easy matter to trump up charges against an arrogant challenger of U.S. secrecy. The charge will be espionage, fella and you ought to know that by now.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Assange isn't a whistle blower. And unlike Manning, Assange had no duty to keep the information secret. It's like publishing the Pentagon Papers.

It IS like the publishing of the Pentagon Papers.

Exposing crimes and lies of the US government should never be a crime in itself.

Except Assange exposed a lot of stuff that did nothing but cause harm to people. His disclosures were reckless, I would have no problem charging him with many counts of negligent homicide.

 

[untermensche]

Manning had a duty to kept information secure. Unless Assange conspired with Manning to get the information, he has done no crime. That's why there's isn't a risk of extradition (expect the risk imagined by loonies).

Manning's duty to his country was bigger than his obligation to a few people in the country that wanted their lies and malfeasance to not become public.

 

[Jarhyn]

Did you pay attention to the Manning trial? You actually could not. It was full of restrictions on public access. National Security...the broad blanket used to squelch any and all opposition to our government. Nobody seems to get it. According to the Bible, what did Adam and Eve do to get their asses tossed out of Eden? Knowledge of good and evil...not being evil...just knowing about it. We are prohibited knowing about the evil our country does in our name. Why do we keep accepting this notion of unknowable information being classified and kept from us? We are the only country in the world with 900 military bases scattered all around the world. We export most of the weapons that appear in these conflicts world wide. The classification system is something that only evil people accept...and they only want it for themselves. We have serious problems and the entire world should know about them and we have no business accepting stonewalling by our government or for that matter any other government. The problem is one of most of the nations of the world being ruled by bullies and thugs that start by making what ought to be a public government PRIVATE. This entire issue is one of SECRET PRIVATIZATION OF GOVERNMENT.

It makes a mockery of our democracy....it is clear that we are being ruled by terrorists, assassins, and full scale war mongers. The two candidates for president both brag about how they will use the military. Assange is a victim of our system without being a citizen of the U.S. This is the case with most of our victims. The Palestinians are victims of the American surrogate in Palestine. A country that lives by the sword dies by the sword. Wake up. Get on board with a gentler more diplomatic and less violent form of leadership...or you will see our country die...either in violent acts or merely the slow death of massive poverty. There is nothing inherent in America to keep it from becoming like Argentina or perhaps Chili or El Salvador or Guatemala. Our wholly inadequate constitution has been stripped away by greedy corporate interests and is almost non existent today. What do you think Wikileaks was about? More information...what we need. We don't need Manning in Jail. There are hundreds of bankers that belong there instead.

Manning had a duty to kept information secure. Unless Assange conspired with Manning to get the information, he has done no crime. That's why there's isn't a risk of extradition (expect the risk imagined by loonies).

This is virtue ethics. Please provide the ethical rule which establishes a real duty to keep information 'secure' that satisfies the particular context we are talking about.

 

[RavenSky]

No one at the New York Times risked arrest by publishing them. That's the point.

Did you pay attention to the Manning trial? You actually could not. <snip long-assed nonsensical rant>

Trausti is correct. If you would actually read for comprehension, you would know that.

The specifics of Assange's case bears no resemblance to Snowden or Manning. The two of them actually leaked information. You can justify that if you want to - that has nothing to do with this thread - the point is they took information they had access to and they disseminated it when they were not supposed to.

Assange did not leak information. He published information that was leaked by others. Apparently he cannot/will not be prosecuted by the USA for that.

 

[Trausti]

Manning had a duty to kept information secure. Unless Assange conspired with Manning to get the information, he has done no crime. That's why there's isn't a risk of extradition (expect the risk imagined by loonies).

This is virtue ethics. Please provide the ethical rule which establishes a real duty to keep information 'secure' that satisfies the particular context we are talking about.

Are you kidding? This isn't "virtue ethics." Manning's duty comes from his employment, position, and oath. He was entrusted with secret information. He breached that trust. See Aldrich Ames.

 

[Harry Bosch]

He does need to fear extradition to the US. That will probably mean enduring the kind of abuses Manning is dealing with.

When whistle blowers are punished that discourages whistle blowing.

It is not a good thing or something anybody should support.

If he were extradictated, he couldn't help the Russians and/or Trump as well.