Julian Assange is a prick.

[mike1921]

I do think he is an asshat for many reasons that have already been mentioned here, and I think he should stand trial in Sweden (if he's innocent then he should go prove it).

However, I personally think he OUGHT to be extradited to the US and face the music for wikileaks. I really don't understand the hard-on that the internet has for that.

Governments have secrets, dirty secrets. ALL OF THEM. YOURS, MINE, and of course the USA. That doesn't mean some little shit should go and publish them on the web like that. That just puts people in danger, and his sources can face treason charges... great.

Oh, and Ecuador has just made the list.

Name something wikileaks posted that put people in danger.

Governments have dirty secrets, that doesn't mean we should accept them and allow them to keep secrets from us. The fact that we have secrets of the level that motivate revolutions (the Arab Spring is considered to be partially caused by wikileaks) goes to show just how little we should trust our government with secrets.

I can't stand the bloke... and it is good to see that others feel the same way...

I also massively disagreed with Wikileaks... I don't care if it was corperate stuff, but government stuff is kept out of the public eye for a reason...

So people don't know the evil shit they've been up to mostly

 

[Supertegwyn]

For one thing, I cannot find any evidence of the case being withdrawn.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8344464/Julian-Assange-rape-accusations-timeline.html

Secondly, I hope Julian Assange burns in hell.

 

[Uncle Comrade]

While the woman was "unconscious" (asleep) when sex was initiated, she woke up to it and they continued. Of course that could still constitute rape, however saying she was "unconscious" makes him out to be a lot worse.

I wasn't trying to smear him, only repeating what I'd heard. Like I said, I wasn't sure how accurate it was.

Personally I'm on the fence about this, the entire situation is basically a legal and diplomatic dead-lock. I don't think it's fair for any typical escapist forum denizen to pass any kind of judgement on the matter.

I'd like to be on the fence, but all the people on either side of the fence keep shaking it so much I'm in danger of falling off. I don't mind people being suspicious of the case, but what's really annoying me are the tinfoil-hatted conspiracy nuts who are raving about it being a set-up while completely ignoring the actual facts.

 

[ikabodjohn]

Sweden just needs to say they won't extradite him to the USA, then we can get the weasel faced (alleged) sex offender albino out of the UK.

 

[Jonluw]

I haven't looked into the case, but what I can say is this:
If I knew I'd never raped anyone, and suddenly earlier dismissed rape charges were brought up against me right after I'd pissed off the world's governments, I sure as hell wouldn't let them take me to court.
You can be damn certain I'd hide away like Assange is doing, because chances I'd be able to prove my innocence would be miniscule.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

A guy who advocates for transparency but is incredibly secretive about his personal life...

He advocates for transparency of the government. Not for transparency of everyone's personal life. So what if he likes to keep his personal life, well, personal? How does that make him a hypocrite?

Yep, an idiot, hypocrite, and rapist all rolled into one. Not the kinda guy I can support personally.

Congratulations. You are brainwashed.

Oh, and he's weak looking.

Really? How do you justify this nonsense?


It's amazing how much the people still trust the mainstream media. They keep lying to you and you trust them without a second thought. It's sad. It's tragic, actually.

And then a person comes along who wants to expose the liars. To tell the world what's really going on. To tell you that you're being lied to, and you hate him for it? Stay classy, humanity.

 

[wrightguy0]

I've always felt that Assange is an ass. He is one of those guy who just has an axe to grind and doesn't really care care about what the consequences of his actions may be. That said, I think that something is very fishy about the case suddenly being re-opened at the time that it was, its just too convenient to be pure chance.

those were my thoughts too, the case was dropped, for all we know he already answered to the charges against him. The Timing of the case is just too damn specific to be anything but a smokescreen. he releases thousands of documents that embarrass the world, with the US as the mos specific target, then suddenly a case of alleged sexual assault that had been dropped is reopened several days after the leak. love him or hate him you can't argue that something seems fishy

Didn't one of the girls also admit she had lied about being assaulted?

 

[xen0blade]

@Adam Jensen:
Embassies are NOT sovereign territory. The host country can revoke ANY diplomatic status at any time. Usually, however, they don't, mostly due to the sheer amount of trouble that it would cause. This is called the Vienna Convention. I urge you to read it so you know what you're talking about.

@Anyone else who mentioned it:
No, Julian Assange has not been charged. He is, in fact, wanted for questioning. The reason for this is simple: under Swedish law, once Assange is charged a trial MUST be held within 14 days. If the trial isn't held then it's dismissed with prejudice, meaning they cannot charge him with that crime for that event again. That is why they haven't charged him.

Also, it is against the law to deny ANY request for extradition unless there is valid reason to do so. If Assange is magically wanted in conjunction for, say, murder, grand theft auto, or anything else in the United States, they by law the Swedish/UK/whatever authorities have a duty to assess whether or not they feel the charges are valid. IF they are then the extradition is arranged, although rarely do extraditions even happen in the first place. Finally, an extradition cannot happen if the host country would not have charged the individual for the crime in the first place. In short, what Assange is ACCUSED of doing constitutes rape under UK law, so the judge authorized the extradition. That's how it works.

 

[Amaror]

I don't have a real opinion about this, but when i read some of the things you guys say, well i really wanna see how YOU would react in his situation:
"Hmm, i am charged for something and they might extradite me to the Usa, where i might be killed..."
"Oh fuck it, i might die of it, but going to court is the right thing to do!"

 

[Neonit]

i dont understand it. government keeps telling me that if i have done nothing wrong, i have nothing to hide, and thus i should reveal everything about myself. but when the tables are turned, then there suddenly IS reason for secets.... huh!

also, "they wont if death penalty is a threat" - listen, in politics, there are no rules. they will simply say "noo, we no kill him! we just waterboard them for 5 year, they die by themselves!"

this whole thing is fishy as all hells. anyone who thinks sweden will not release him because of some treaty is naive. iirc they did already extradite someone who faced death penalty or torture.

he might be a prick. you might not like him. i for one have no feelings one way or another, besides the fact that he IS under danger of political persecution. the extend of this danger is maybe debatable, but it does exist.

 

[ScaryAlmond]

I don't have a real opinion about this, but when i read some of the things you guys say, well i really wanna see how YOU would react in his situation:
"Hmm, i am charged for something and they might extradite me to the Usa, where i might be killed..."
"Oh fuck it, i might die of it, but going to court is the right thing to do!"

What I read said that the Swedish Government cannot extradite a person to any country wherein they would face the death penalty, since that would be a violation of the European Convention of Human Rights

I don't think anyone thinks that he will be killed it's too high profile what could happen though is that he could be sentenced to life imprisonment or indefinitely detained without charge under the NDAA.
Personally I think the latter is more likely as it's easier to sentence someone if your the judge and jury and prosecutor.
These are examples of what would happen if he is extradited.
Sweden has said they will not extradite if there is a chance of execution which is them repeating the laws they have to obey.

 

[MiskWisk]

While I do feel Assange's concerns are valid, I also agree with the statement he is a prick. I personally compare him to a tabloid journalist stereotype of not caring about anyone other than himself and no secret is too damning to be released. I feel he should be charged since his actions have directly put soldiers, international relations, civilians and people who have aided the efforts of NATO in Afghanistan and other areas. To me, he is a man with no concept of why a secret is not spread about. I understand leaking brutality of soldiers and that it should be done and not hidden, but most of what he leaked should not be common knowledge.

As to whether the case about him being a rapist or not, well I go for innocent until proven guilty but I will say he isn't helping himself.

[presumably you mean 'at risk']

Evidence?

Also I may be wrong, but I heard that he had sex with the woman while she was unconcious, which while it may or may not be rape, is definitely a bit creepy.

So you admit yourself that it probably isn't rape, and considering the context in which the situation occurred, it definitely isn't, but then you say that it is 'definitely a bit creepy'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20011886-503543.html

Wikileaks outs Afghan sympathisers. Bearing in mind how terrorist groups react to small things, they are likely going to view this as treason. I personally would not like to be in the situation where my name and address is given to terrorists along with the information that I support their enemies.

From the article: "One specific example cited by the paper is a report on an interview conducted by military officers of a potential Taliban defector. The militant is named, along with his father and the village in which they live."

While soldiers, international relations and civilians in America can be protected, it is much harder for Americans to protect people outside America.

 

[Neonit]

snip

There is also the possibility that he is a rapist. That needs to be conclusively disproven before I giving a shit about his political problems.

oh no doubt about that, he should stand before court. But you cant expect someone to make a stand at court, defend his case, all this in fear that he will be deported to USA to god knows which one of torture camps.

that would not be a fair trial, in that case war criminals get better treatment and thats just wrong.

 

[CaptainMarvelous]

He won't go because he IS guilty. Unless you have solid evidence Sweden is corrupt rather than, y'know, trying to demonstrate the criminal justice system would you kindly stop pretending Sweden is subordinate to America? They aren't and most likely wont extradite since hes probably spending time in Swedish prison. And if he was scared of extradition would BRITAIN be the best place to go? We're pretty friendly with America and Europe.