How will Assange be punished for attempting to advance democracy?

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by nirakar, Dec 1, 2010.

?

How will Assange be punished for attempting to advance democracy?

  1. Give Assange a heart attack.

    3 vote(s)
    15.0%
  2. Have Assange die in a plane crash.

    2 vote(s)
    10.0%
  3. Have Assange commit suicide.

    4 vote(s)
    20.0%
  4. Put Assange in Jail for decades for a crime not related to his work.

    11 vote(s)
    55.0%
  1. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575


    Asylum seekers Mohammed al-Zari and Ahmed Agiza were transferred from Stockholm to Cairo in December 2001 aboard a United States government-leased airplane. The government of Sweden expelled al-Zari and Agiza, both suspected of terrorist activities, following written assurances from the Egyptian authorities that they would not be subject to the death penalty, tortured, or ill-treated, and would receive fair trials. Swedish and Egyptian authorities also agreed on a post-return monitoring mechanism involving visits to the men in prison. The men had no opportunity under Swedish law to challenge the legality of their expulsions or the reliability of the Egyptian assurances.

    In May 2004 a Swedish television news program, "Kalla Fakta," revealed that the two men were apprehended and physically assaulted by Swedish police; handed over to the custody of hooded US operatives at Stockholm's Bromma airport who cut off the men's clothing and blindfolded, hooded, diapered, and drugged them; and then transported aboard a US government-leased Gulfstream jet to Cairo.The involvement of the US in the men's transfers has since been confirmed by the Swedish government.​

    Alzery v. Sweden

    Agiza v. Sweden


    Swedish TV4 Kalla Fakta Program: "The Broken Promise"
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    Assange is not brown, Muslim, and obscure to the world. Assange is not subject to the special-rendition dragnet that has fed the US gulag of detention and torture without trial. Prisoners of that system have never included Western media personalities or Western dissidents. If it were otherwise, Assange would have been flown away Terrorist Class to parts unknown before he ever got many chances to cavort with WikiGroupies.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    I think the media is too focused on his personal and private life, which gives the appearance that he has lost his way.

    You missed my point.

    People are more focused on him than they are on the actual leaks..

    I mean look at this discussion as a perfect example. People are more focused on the man than they are on the information that has been leaked.

    His skin shouldn't have anything to do with anything. The only thing the world should be focused on is what he has divulged. But instead, we're concerned about whether he used a condom or not. So he then has to defend himself against the accusations and he is criticised for having lost his way as a result.

    Either way, he cannot win.

    I think any threat against someone's life is unjust.

    He does not need to go back to Sweden. The charges have all the appearance of being bogus. How many women he sleeps with is no one's concern. The charges of rape, when they first appeared, were thrown out of court because the facts did not add up or point to rape and there was a complete lack of evidence. So he was told he could go about his business and he was told he could leave the country. Now suddenly, another dump later and the charges return (funny that) and America starts rumbling about his being a terrorist and about extradition. He knows that the laws in the UK offers him more protection against extradition.. Of course he's going to fight going back to Sweden. Hell, the judge who heard his case in the UK stated that he did not expect him to face the charges in Sweden because the evidence was so flimsy and because of the simple fact that the courts in Sweden threw it out on the same evidence a few months ago.

    You appear to be more concerned that he wasn't nice to women. Seriously, what business is it of anyone which woman he has sex with and when and how? You are buying into what the media feeds you. Maybe it is American media that is at fault.

    Your attacks against him are personal in nature. You have an issue with the man.. Ignore the man and look at what he is releasing. That is what you and everyone should be doing.

    The whole rape charge is shaky Hype.

    I am curious about your gullibility here. No offense, but it's like you're parroting fox.

    You are more concerned about who he sleeps with and his behaviour outside of Wikileaks than you are about the leaks themselves.

    You'd be surprised. Your Government runs an offshore prison and tortures people for information, as a starter. I think you may be deluded in thinking that you're not a closed society. You are very much a closed society with a semblance of freedom.

    Okay.. What does Sweden have to do with Wikileaks?

    The issue with Sweden is a private matter and outside of Wikileaks and outside of the leaked documents themselves.

    And?

    Does it bother you that he has sex with different women or has one night stands?

    Hmm.. You tell me:

    "bedding down with strangers"​


    Your Government's message to the world has not really changed Hype.

    If you are a Wikileaks fan, I'd suggest you ignore Assange "bedding down with strangers".

    It is directly tied to the case. He was bragging about what he did. Assange never divulged his name..

    By saying he'll name names?

    So your claim that it is all unfounded was what exactly?

    Again, personal attacks about how he reacts to private threats made against himself and others around him...?

    Hmmm... So the question remains, why are you concentrating so much on his personal life?

    You think he should face trial for the leaks?

    He has megadumped and released names in the past..

    Did you miss the parts where he has walked out on interviews and ignored questions about his personal life and states clearly that he only wants to discuss the leaked documents? I mean if it were all about "his precious Assange", he'd only discuss himself, wouldn't he?

    And yet...?

    You mean again? He's beaten it before when the courts threw it out due to lack of evidence and facts... So how many times is he going to have to beat this particular rap? Each time he does a document dump?

    And yet.. above..:

    "The legal grounds for extraditing Assange to the USA are very shaky. Swedish authorities have ruled out extraditing him through the present warrant. They are adamant about keeping the matter of rape legally separate from the highly strained and hypothetical threats of an extradition to the USA for espionage. It is not so easy in USi tradition and habit to specially-render a prominent white boy from Over There without a semblance of legitimate legal process." ​

    And it is not something you can guarantee, is it?

    You mean by turning himself in, going to jail, etc?

    How utterly irresponsible!

    Again, you concentrate too much on him..

    By fighting a dubious rape charge?

    Investigative journalists go out of their way to get the story - He is the messenger in that people being him the information and he publishes it.

    He provides the documents to select news sources and then announces their release.. That is it.

    He does not strip down and shake his tata's at the announcements, he does not take any personal questions during the announcements. He announces and he leaves. Really, at this point I need to ask, what more do you want?

    The media has dug into his private life, tracked down his son and named said son in the media, they have tracked down his mother and named her and where she works and what she does, even where she lives. His interviews focus more on his personal life and when he rightly refuses to answer those questions, he is blamed for it.. So really, what more do you want?

    But he has not. He has given the media organisations all the information and they have decided to release what they wanted to release..

    Yes, but you are expecting that he goes to Sweden to face charges and then face the possibility of extradition when the charges in Sweden are a private matter and no one's business.. You are expecting him to act in a way that no one else would have. anyone in that situation would fight extradition to Sweden.

    He is the leader of the organisation.

    Would you prefer he protrays himself as the mailman?

    Ermm your quotes don't show that.. Quite the contrary:

    "Although I still write, research and investigate my role is primarily that of a publisher and editor-in-chief who organises and directs other journalists." ​


    The next quote he keeps saying by "us".. etc..

    The article you linked about his staff stated that they were starting their own 'leaks' site. From your link earlier:

    Former WikiLeaks supporters at odds with founder Julian Assange will shortly launch OpenLeaks, a rival project aiming to get secret documents directly to media, one of them said Friday.

    “I can confirm that we will be operating under the name ‘OpenLeaks’,” said former Icelandic WikiLeaks member Herbert Snorrason.

    -----------------------------------------------

    The Icelander, who quit WikiLeaks after a public feud with Assange, had already in November told media about the rival project.



    (Source)


    So starting a rival organisation is a show of love and support?

    By telling the media to stick to the subject and stop discussing his rape charges which is private and personal and has nothing to do with Wikileaks?

    So why do you keep focusing on his private life like the rest of the media pack?

    Why make comments about his not being nice women?

    I think that is a matter of personal opinion. I happen to disagree with you.

    And again, the question remains. You haven't been clear. The thread is "How will Assange be punished for attempting to advance democracy?".. So why are you talking about his not being nice to women. How do you know he's not nice to women? Those women were twittering about how great he was, etc, before the rape charges mysteriously appeared after the previous document dump. You are accusing him of not focusing on Wikileaks when you aren't focusing on it either. You are demanding he goes back to Sweden to answer the charges - again, nothing to do with Wikileaks. Your responses have been a mirror of what you have seen in the media.

    And that information is coming to light. I'd suggest you focus more on it than the messenger and demand your media does the same.

    But he has been on message. He has provided the information but no one is listening because they are too interested in the sordid details of his sex life as reported by the media and as released by the Swedish Government.

    But he is not. The media is.

    He is not to blame for the media wanting their dose of gossip.

    So why is the US calling him a terrorist?

    Which has what to do with Wikileaks and this thread topic?

    No, he has not. He has released to the media and released it on the site.

    By telling the States to back off?

    I think he has the grounds to.

    Again, why is his personal conduct coming up for discussion?

    And you still don't have a point. You have consistently been off-topic about this thread. Unless you think not wearing a condom when he fucks a woman is an attempt to advance democracy, you really have no reason to accuse me of trolling.

    You have made repeated accusations against him and how he runs the organisation - again, not on topic at all.

    I have been trying to get you to understand a simple fact. Assange's sex life and personal life has nothing to do with Wikileaks. Stop complaining that he's not the hero you want him to be. No one is perfect.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    so ahh bells
    this guy is clearly out of line here
    shall i sfog his ass?

    from another thread

     
  8. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    irrelevant garbage. you hold the swedish system to be beyond reproach. i provide a contrary instance which you disingenuously dismiss with platitudes that are nothing but an article of faith on your part

    UN report by Manfred Nowak

    Manfred Nowak, a special reporter on torture, has catalogued in a 15-page U.N. report presented to the 191-member General Assembly that the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, France, Sweden and Kyrgyzstan are violating international human rights conventions by deporting terrorist suspects to countries such as Egypt, Syria, Algeria and Uzbekistan, where they may have been tortured.

    "The United States is holding at least 26 persons as “ghost detainees” at undisclosed locations outside of the United States," Human Rights Watch said on December 1, 2005, as it released a list naming some of the detainees. The detainees are being held indefinitely and incommunicado, without legal rights or access to counsel.​

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition_by_the_United_States#UN_report_by_Manfred_Nowak


    A Syrian-born Canadian citizen, Arar was detained in September 2002 at New York's Kennedy Airport, on suspicion of having links to al-Qaida, which was responsible for the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States.

    The information came from a Canadian police report describing him as well as his wife as Islamic extremists with suspected terrorist links.

    Against his protests and after interrogations by U.S. officials, he was deported to Syria via Jordan, where he says he suffered severe torture for 10 months at the hands of Syria's Military Intelligence, before his release in October 2003.

    Arar was never formally accused of any crime in the United States or Canada. A two-and-a-half-year Canadian investigation cleared him of any links with terrorist organizations or activities, and ordered that he be paid more than $10 million in compensation.​

    http://www.voanews.com/english/news/a-13-2007-10-18-voa71-66518612.html
     
  9. Fall Caesar Registered Member

    Messages:
    46
    And to clarify, Assange is (by US definitions) not a terrorist until he commits a violent crime against noncombatant targets. In fact, none of his leaking actions have been directly violent, and perhaps have not been indirectly violent either. And that's even beyond the 'innocent until proven otherwise' notion. The physical leaks have thus far not harmed civilian lives (or at least I am unaware of reports they have), directly or indirectly, and AFAIK only endanger named US/Afghan troops, which are, last time I checked, in a state of war. WikiLeaks is likewise not a "terrorist group".

    (From U.S. Code Title 22, Ch.38, Para. 2656f(d)

    (d) Definitions
    As used in this section—
    (1) the term “international terrorism” means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than 1 country;
    (2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;
    (3) the term “terrorist group” means any group, or which has significant subgroups which practice, international terrorism;


    Sticks and stones...sticks and stones...
     
  10. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    pardon
    standard operating procedure. we attempt to stay focused on the topic at hand and allow digression if relevant and logical

    this is what assange expected in the interview with atika. he obviously came on board to talk about wikileaks and objected when when topics were switched. his prerogative i think
    JA - 14:59
    Yeah but this interview is about something else. I will have to walk if you are, if you are going to contaminate this extremely serious interview with questions about my personal life​



    • i was still on the atika/king interviews where assange accuses of atika of "contaminating/conflating" the leaks with rape allegations

      it was a hypothetical that attempts to illustrate a probable sentiment held by most given the media frenzy over the rape allegations. assange as a rapist

      kinda like this one...

      assange never said that

      thats not the argument
      it is that sweden will serve as a platform for a possible extradition.

      you are all over the map. schizophrenia comes to mind

      i'll do whatever the fuck i want, you condescending little man. who the fuck made you god?

      /snicker
     
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2011
  11. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    You're constructing a false dilemma here, Gustav. To assert that Assange's evasion of responsibility for his actions is a serious distraction from the WikiLeaks mission does not mean that this observation prohibits itself. Please be reasonable.
     
  12. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    I would suggest you be reasonable.

    You are demanding that Assange be the hero you want him to be, by simply giving in and flying back to Sweden and face possible extradition to the US (and we both know it is highly possible that he will be extradited).. You are demanding that he not be a normal human being and fight against said extradition.

    Maybe it is time for Sweden to take responsibility for their actions.
     
  13. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    As I posted above with a link to an official Swedish Government source, Sweden cannot extradite Assange to the USA without UK say-so: There is no additional jeopardy to Assange of being extradited to the USA, by honoring the Swedish warrant. Swedish authorities have stated that they can not and will not extradite Assange on separate charges to a third country beyond the E.U., because present treaties do not allow that. Normally I would be happy to repeat the link here, or re-iterate my earlier post, but I have reason to doubt whether you are actually interested in what I have to say here. If that is the case, please do not comment on or characterize my posts (thanks).
     
  14. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    BTW / in reference to your link above, I can direct you to more of that story if you're interested (I think a separate thread would be appropriate, since it pertains more to peer-to-peer filesharing). This story has not played out in a favorable light for U.S. arm-twisters, nor for Swedish Government toadies. Hint: The Swedish Parliament has considerably more to say about it, and with authority.
     
  15. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    fuck off
    3 fucking infractions? in emj?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    needy little man
     
  16. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    @ Gustav: We can work it out: PM hypewaders (it's off-topic here).

    _________________

    For Bells (since it's a long way up the page, some of my doing) re: extradition:
     
  17. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    For rape? Maybe. Do you think the UK would refuse?

    And from a link you provided earlier in this thread, which frankly, should make anyone dubious about the relationship between the US and Sweden:

    The secret cables, seen by The Daily Telegraph, disclose how Swedish officials wanted discussions about anti-terrorism operations kept from public scrutiny.

    They describe how officials from the Swedish Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Foreign Affairs had a “strong degree of satisfaction with current informal information sharing arrangements” with the American government.

    Making the arrangement formal would result in the need for it to be disclosed to Parliament, they said.

    They disclose officials’ fear that intense Swedish Parliamentary scrutiny could place “a wide range of law enforcement and anti-terrorism” operations in jeopardy.

    ------------------------------------------------------

    Wikileaks claimed the new cables, which discuss terrorist screening programs, added weight to suggestions that Sweden and America were engaged in “back room deals”.

    Mark Stephens, Mr Assange’s lawyer, has claimed his client was facing a “show trial” and his case was politically motivated. The Swedish government denies the claims.

    Kristinn Hrafnsson, a Wikileaks spokesman, said that the website was “concerned about political influence on the prosecution of Julian Assange”.

    “The new revelations contained in the Swedish cables … shed some light on the ferocity of the Swedish prosecutorial process in this case,” he said.

    “The prosecutor has said there is ‘no condition’ for bail that will satisfy them.”



    (Source)


    No condition for bail that would satisfy them when a few months ago they dropped the charges immediately due to lack of evidence? When they haven't even formally charged him with rape or sexual assault and only wanted him for questioning?

    I'm sorry Hype, but how gullible are you?

    Wikileaks released documents about the 'special relationship' between Sweden and America (involving the Ministry of Justice no less). You have dubious wording from the Swedish Government about extraditing him to the US. You have the US making a hell of a lot of noise about extraditing him to the US to face possible charges (espionage, terrorism to name a few). And you're saying they can't do it?

    And "Hint", don't claim that the Swedish Parliament has more to say about "it with authority" when your own link shows how Government departments have been conducting affairs with the US, in regards to terrorist operations and investigations, informally to bypass any Parliamentary scrutiny. Your claims and your links keep contradicting themselves.
     
  18. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575

    i doubt that
    you are abusing your mod privileges
    step down if you cannot exercise authority in an appropriate and fair manner
    fucking control freak
     
  19. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    ja
    i posted the goddamn alzery and agiza incidents. in this goddamn page
    what a fucking nutjob

    one thing cablegate showed us was how govts conspired
    we now have a probable conspiracy unfolding before us and this fuck feeds us the official govt line?

    i mean....wtf?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    hehe
    my buddy is infracting me right outta sci
    megalomaniacal fucker

    /spits
     
  21. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    Here's what I've been referring to -sorry for the confusion:

    telegraph.co.uk: Swedish government hid anti-terror opererations with America from Parliament
     
  22. StrawDog disseminated primatemaia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,373
    @Hype
    Your reasoning is sound friend. However, my gut feel (given the unpredictable nature of the US rabid dog involved here) is for Assange to stay put right now, and release some real juice. Lets see how that goes? :m:
     
  23. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575

    sound reasoning?
    hype presents the formal,.......

    Facts about extradition of a person who has been surrendered

    Different rules apply within the EU (surrender) and outside the EU (extradition).

    Due to general agreements in the European Arrest Warrant Act, Sweden cannot extradite a person who has been surrendered to Sweden from another country without certain considerations.

    Concerning surrender to another country within the European Union, the Act states that the executing country under certain circumstances must approve a further surrender.

    On the other hand, if the extradition concerns a country outside the European Union the authorities in the executing country (the country that surrendered the person) must consent such extradition. Sweden cannot, without such consent, extradite a person, for example to the USA.
    ....the informal
    The secret cables, seen by The Daily Telegraph, disclose how Swedish officials wanted discussions about anti-terrorism operations kept from public scrutiny.

    They describe how officials from the Swedish Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Foreign Affairs had a “strong degree of satisfaction with current informal information sharing arrangements” with the American government.

    Making the arrangement formal would result in the need for it to be disclosed to Parliament​


    and....


    .......picks one. that is what will assuredly happen since.....

    ...assange is a white first worlder

    you call this sound reasoning?
     

Share This Page