One Year Since Assange Took Refuge in Ecuadorian Embassy 541
Daniel_Stuckey writes with an article marking the one year anniversary of Julian Assange seeking asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy. From the article: "Uninterested in facing U.S. justice, Assange said he's prepared to spend five years living there. If he goes out for a walk, he'll be extradited to Sweden to answer rape accusations —after which he has no promise from Sweden to deny further extradition efforts to America, where a grand jury investigation into WikiLeaks awaits. This also means that London's Metropolitan Police have been devoting their resources to keeping tabs on Assange for a year. Yesterday, a spokesperson explained the updated costs of guarding the embassy over the phone: 'From July 2012 through May 2013, the full cost has been £3.8 million ($5,963,340),' he said. '£700,000 ($1,099,560) of which are additional, or overtime costs.'
Julian has a treadmill, a SAD lamp, and a connection to the Internet, through which he's been publishing small leaks and conducting interviews. The indoor lifestyle has taken its toll on Julian, and it led to his contracting a chronic lung condition last fall."
Re:seems like a waste of money (Score:3, Insightful)
Why bother guarding the embassy?
In this case I think that is a very good question. If they put up a reward for a tenth of what they've paid on guarding him, send posters round the area, then he would not get far if he got out. Its not like he's a Muslim terrorist who will exit in a burka and plant bombs when he gets out.
But he's a rapist, like Dominique Strauss Kahn!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Lots of people turn to raping after making speeches [guardian.co.uk] criticizing the primacy of the U.S. dollar, or revealing U.S. top secret documents. Hell, it wouldn't surprise me if Edward Snowden weren't considering raping some poor women right now, or molesting kids, or selling secrets to the Chinese, or kicking puppies.
Re:rat scurry (Score:5, Insightful)
Fugitive, yes. But remember that every oppressive dictatorship in history has carried out their purges and atrocities in the name of 'justice.' It is a very flexible concept. What one country considered justice, another may well consider crimes against humanity - and often the same is true with the roles reversed. He isn't hiding from the rape accusation* - he he hiding from the US (He believes Sweden to be acting as their proxy), and given their treatment of other people involved in high-profile leaks** it could certainly be argued that any paranoia he feels is justified.
If I believed the US were trying to extradite me in connection with a major leak, I'd be packing my bags and buying a train ticket as far as I could go by cash.
*It isn't rape exactly, but there is no precise equivilent in UK or US law, so 'rape' is close enough. A better translation might be 'sex by deception.'
**Manning, kept in solitary confinement for years without trial, then being tried at a secret court in which he isn't permitted to see the evidence presented against him.
Consider the alternative. (Score:3, Insightful)
If Assange comes out, he'll be arrested and jailed. He won't be in general population, so the cost of guarding him will not be $28k per year. He'll be isolated and placed on suicide watch, increasing the cost considerably. His lung condition will have to be treated.
The current situation suits "The Government" very well: he's isolated, he's got little access to specialized medical treatment and the cost of keeping him in there is equal, if not smaller that having him go to jail and on trial.
Re:Sweden is not, in fact, the US. (Score:1, Insightful)
Sweden refused to have the workings of their legal system dictated to them by a fugitive?
I can't thing of many countries where that would wash.
Re:seems like a waste of money (Score:5, Insightful)
No it's worse than that, he posted some text on the internet!
Re:seems like a waste of money (Score:3, Insightful)
They're getting paid anyways, the question is where they could be used better resource wise is the issue.
Re:Sweden is not, in fact, the US. (Score:4, Insightful)
"Uninterested in facing U.S. justice..."
I do want to point out that Assange is not facing U.S. justice. What he is "uninterested in facing" is a return to Sweden to be questioned on rape charges.
He says that if he's sent to Sweden, Sweden will extradite him to the U.S.. There's no actual evidence for that, and no real reason to believe it.
Considering the rape charges magically appeared after he was identified as a US VIP (Very Interrogate-able Person), the writing on the wall certainly indicates his stay in Sweden would be rather short indeed.
Re:rat scurry (Score:5, Insightful)
That allegation, as I understand it, is that after having had protected sex with the lady the evening before, she woke up in the morning to discover him having unprotected sex with her.
Unless you believe that the consent to protected sex from the night before includes consent to unprotected sex the next morning, he was having sex with her without her consent. Therefore it would be rape.
Re:This is stupid (Score:4, Insightful)
oh good a rape joke, very classy
A joke like our "corrections" system, classy like a prison system which very much does include rape.
Re:seems like a waste of money (Score:2, Insightful)
The IRA never disarmed, they just forked and created another IRA under the moniker "Real IRA"
Re:rat scurry (Score:3, Insightful)
Why do you assume I had any particular example in mind? The world isn't as simple as the 'free world' vs 'oppressive dictatorships.' There's a bit of oppression in every government - they just vary in how much, and who it is pointed at.
Re:seems like a waste of money (Score:4, Insightful)
And the left is abusing it just as much if not moreso than the right. So get off your high partisan horse and see the nation for what it really is.
Re:seems like a waste of money (Score:2, Insightful)
Fascism can both either left and right. Doesn't even have to be "far" to either side.
But good dodge around the fact that a leftist government made the Jews their target in the 1930s.
Re:seems like a waste of money (Score:2, Insightful)
No it's worse than posting text on the Internet, he's accused of rape.
Re:But he's a rapist, like Dominique Strauss Kahn! (Score:5, Insightful)
Lots of people turn to raping after making speeches criticizing the primacy of the U.S. dollar, or revealing U.S. top secret documents. Hell, it wouldn't surprise me if Edward Snowden weren't considering raping some poor women right now, or molesting kids, or selling secrets to the Chinese, or kicking puppies.
In politics that if you can't attack the message, you attack the messenger. The United States has several organizations dedicated to discrediting people who come forward with allegations of impropriety against the government. It is a standard tactic used by many governments; Distributing disinformation is a time-honored military and political strategy.
And it is very effective. Just look at this thread: Some people have been completely taken in by it and the discussion now revolves not around the correctness of whistle blowing, or whether society benefits from an organization like wikileaks, or if what the government was exposed in having done was right or wrong... the entire discussion now centers largely on Julian.
Re:This is stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Can't they get him out (Score:2, Insightful)
They really should make a hamster ball embassy for him to walk around in.
Re:at what point do we stop kidding ourselves. (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm not sure there's anything better about the way you put it. All you've done is taken what he thought the prosecutors decided to do and informed us that a judge made the decision instead. That explanation reads as them stating they only want him for questioning, but a technicality in their procedure says they need to arrest him beforehand, so they're refusing to question him through other means. It's really just as bad as, if not worse than, the prosecutors being the ones to opt out of questioning him.
Everything about this case is shady. I can't say whether he did something worth prosecution to those women, but the case against him has been far too inconsistent to hold up in any fair court. The original prosecutor cancelled the first arrest warrant stating she didn't think a rape had been committed, then another was issued again stating the charge was rape, then the appeals court lowered the charge again. The plaintiffs themselves have given inconsistent stories, shown having a good time with the man accused of raping them after the rape occurred. I know this doesn't mean he's innocent, even without the rape charges he seems to be a bit of a slimy guy so I'd be shocked if there wasn't something he should be in jail for, but everything about this case is total bullshit, right down to people like you acting like it's not total bullshit.
Re: Can't they get him out (Score:4, Insightful)
Because if the Brits storm Ecuador's embassy, their own embassies hold no status not to be taken over to unlock the asylum granted people inside. Im sure there are some ugly countries that would love an excuse to knock down their local UK embassy.
Re:seems like a waste of money (Score:5, Insightful)
No he's not. He's wanted for questioning. There's a distinct difference.
If he was officially accused of rape - i.e. if there was enough evidence to accuse him then the Swedish authorities would've decided to prosecute and ask for extradition based on that prosecution, instead they just want to get him to Sweden merely to "question" him, even though as the Ecuadorian authorities have pointed out there's no reason they couldn't do this at the embassy if it's necessary before pressing charges because they've done this before in other cases so it's perfectly possible under Swedish law.
Which is really what makes it all so odd, if there's so much certainty he committed rape, why not just press charges and issue a warrant based on that? Why pull him all the way to another country merely to just ask a few questions? He even offered to go to them and do this at the Swedish embassy in London for a while prior to seeking asylum.
Really if the rape charges are legit and he desperately needs to answer them this question could be resolved way more cheaply than funding this ongoing saga. Flying a couple of officers to the UK or using some possibly already present in the Swedish embassy would cost next to nothing just to question. Then once they've question if they want to press charges they can, and Assange's case is suddenly greatly weakened. The fact they're unwilling to spend next to nothing to backup their assertions is quite telling.
You don't spend $3.8million guarding an embassy and then millions more in politician, advisor, lawyer and additional police wages just to ask some questions. There's much more to it than that.
Re:at what point do we stop kidding ourselves. (Score:5, Insightful)
Do note that the executed citizens were promoting terrorist activities against the USA from countries unable to arrest them. Had these people surrendered themselves they would have been brought to trial.
Its true because someone in the government said so? So we can kill them. Based on just that.
We know he was a terrorist because he had a trial? Where the prosecution and defense made there case and a jury agreed he was guilty? No. We didn't do any of that. So we don't know he was terrorist.
Next you'll be saying why bother with a trial for murderers? The prosecution wouldn't be after them if they weren't murderers. We don't need checks and balances. If the prosecution just decides someone is guilty, that's good enough for you right?
Why would the prosecution lie? That would never happen. Could they make a mistake? Surely not!
Bradley Manning on the other hand I have nothing but contempt for and whatever sentence he gets will not be sufficient to satisfy me that he's been punished for what he did.
Nothing but contempt for a person who did what he believed was right, who took tremendous personal risks, and knew what the penalties would be, but carried on because of his conscious? That's the man you have nothing but contempt for?
He is not a bad person, nor a corrupt one. He was merely wrong. In a world full of truly evil and corrupt people seeking personal power, and to erode our freedom... here's a guy who genuinely wants to do the right thing. And you can't punish him enough?
The guy deserves a light sentence. He is not the enemy of america.
You, however, might be. With your acceptence of a transformed america where the government decides which citizens are guilty without trials, and then kills them with drones.
Re:seems like a waste of money (Score:2, Insightful)
Once can be an advocate for Wikileaks, and other work done by Assange, but not be a defender of his behavior regarding the alleged treatment of Swedish women and his flight from justice.
Ecuador, which nobody really confuses with countries that truly value personal liberty and civil rights, almost certainly gave Assange refuge since he is a fellow leftist that damaged the United States.
Members of the US Congress and TV commentators don't set government policy, nor can they approve assassination, or other adverse actions.
Assange isn't wanted for "mere questioning," it is a formality before changes can be filed and a trial started. You keep ignoring the difference in the Swedish legal system from others which you are more accustomed to. You complain that I see the world in black and white, but dismiss facts inconvenient for Assange's position.
It seems apparent that Assange has colluded with people with people engaged in espionage against the United States that resulted in useful intelligence information getting into the hands of the Taliban and al Qaida, not to mention foreign nations that are adversaries of the United States. This has had repercussions.
Many of the oddities around this are due to the fact that Assange has engaged in unusual behavior, and performed unusual deeds. He has done unusually notable things. Some of the notable things he has done are not creditable.
Wikileaks is arguably a meaningful accomplishment, and special. Assanges behavior regarding his behavior in Sweden, much less so.
It should also be noted that Britain has its own extradition treaty with the US. If this was all just a ruse, it would be far more straight forward for the US to ask Sweden to drop the extradition request and request extradition to the US. That isn't happening. The allegations against Assange in Sweden would seem to be almost certainly genuine. The question is will he face trial and be convicted. It seems unlikely that he will be able to remain there forever indefinitely, and would seem to have little chance of another escape.
There are indeed special and unusual aspects of this case. But do you hold that they justify denying justice to two Swedish women that allege that they were sexually assaulted? Is Assange that special so as to justify that?
After all, Hans Reiser did go to jail, didn't he? Hans Reiser must pay kids $60 million [sfgate.com]