Ecuador Puts Out the Garbage

Julian Assange, notorious rapist and willing tool of Putin (formerly also known for being a co-founder of WikiLeaks) has the last seven years been squatting at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to avoid being sent to Sweden to answer for charges in several cases of rape and sexual molestation.

On Thursday the Ecuadorian Embassy asked British Police to assist them in removing Assange from their premises after his political asylum had been revoked by the Ecuadorian President.

In the video below president Lenin Moreno, explains why the asylum was revoked.

Ecuador decidió soberanamente retirar el asilo diplomático a Julian Assange por violar reiteradamente convenciones internacionales y protocolo de convivencia. #EcuadorSoberano pic.twitter.com/V02pvvtPY0

— Lenín Moreno (@Lenin) April 11, 2019

President Moreno doesn't elaborate on some of the truly disgusting things Assange has done towards his hosts, I will follow his example and instead refer you to the Internet for further information. 

Throwing Stones In Closets

Did Julian Assange sexually molest, unlawfully coersce and rape women in Sweden? Yes.
Did Julian Assange break bail of £240,000? Yes.
Did Julian Assange abscond to a closet in an Ecuadorian embassy? Yes.
Is Julian Assange still living in that same closet six years later? Yes.

— Bock McMillan™ (@BockMcMillan) February 10, 2018

There is a proverb that says, "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones." The same applies to people who live in closets and support presidents who support spousal abuse.

---
P.S. It seems I responded to a fake account. Damn! But I'll leave it up as a rebuttal to the fake-Assange tweet anyway.

Assange: "I Do Not Forgive Or Forget"

The guardian.com today reports:

"Swedish prosecutors have dropped their preliminary investigation into an allegation of rape against the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, bringing an end to a seven-year legal standoff.

The decision was taken after prosecutors concluded that “at this point, all possibilities to conduct the investigation are exhausted”, Sweden’s director of public prosecutions, Marianne Ny, said on Friday.

“In order to proceed with the case, Julian Assange would have to be formally notified of the criminal suspicions against him. We cannot expect to receive assistance from Ecuador regarding this. Therefore the investigation is discontinued.

“If he, at a later date, makes himself available, I will be able to decide to resume the investigation immediately.”

Julian Assange's response to the news was to tweet a happy picture of himself and then later another tweet saying: "Detained for 7 years without charge while my children grew up and my name was slandered. I do not forgive or forget.”

---
Well, all I can say I is, that neither will I forgive or forget that Julian Assange is a suspected rapist who evaded the judicial process for seven years by holing up in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. He has only himself to blame for the drawn out process of this case.

It is too much to hope for that he will set foot in Sweden before 2020 so that he can be brought to court to answer the serious allegations against him. 

Will Assange Keep Promise?

@wikileaks When can we hope to see suspected rapist Assange board the plane to the U.S. now that @BarackObama has granted Manning clemency?

— (((Bock McMillan)))™ (@BockMcMillan) January 18, 2017

Julian Assange, suspected rapist, who has chosen to be in self-elected isolation at the Ecuadorian embassy in London for a longer period than he would probably have been jailed if he had instead chosen to stand trial for his alleged crimes in Sweden, recently offered to go to the United States if President Obama granted clemency for Chelsea Manning.

Well, now that President Obama has done just that, and Manning will be set free in May 2017, it remains to be seen if Assange will keep his promise. I most certainly will not hold my breath.

2016

I will not miss you, 2016, you were a horrendous and worthless year with only a few redeeming qualities. 

I will not delve into all shit you caused, but I will drop a few names. Donald J. Trump, Vladimir "Little Father" Putin, Bashar Al-Assad, Julian Assange and, last but not least, Aleppo.

Among the few redeeming factors were Tomais, Dej, JJ, Pook, Kevin (previously known as Knox) and the Smith Boys, Kahvy and Garrett. I must also add Ebbe Linden and Bento and the welcome extra prims.

Let us all hope - and join forces - to fight for a better 2017!

Detention Order for Assange Remains in Place

Do you remember Julian Assange, the co-founder of Wikileaks, who after a visit to Sweden during the summer of 2010 is suspected of one count of rape, two counts of sexual molestation and one count of unlawful coercion?

Julian Assange;Photography Anthony Devlin/PA

The Stockholm District Court at the time decided to detain Assange in absentia for the suspected crimes.

Assange, who denies the allegations, has refused to come to Sweden for the investigation into the crimes and has, after the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom decided that he should be extradited from the United Kingdom to Sweden, sought refuge at the embassy of the Republic of Ecuador in Britain since June 19, 2012.

Assange's Swedish lawyer had now asked the court to repeal the order of detention arguing that Swedish prosecutors have dragged out the case for an unreasonably long period by not interviewing him at the embassy and that it has entailed an undue infringement and adverse effect on Assange's liberty (citing his two year long voluntary "house arrest" at the embassy).

The Swedish prosecution had asked that the detention order should be upheld.

The Stockholm District Court today decided that the detention order should remain in place as the reasons for it offset the infringement and any adverse effects the measure entails for Julian Assange. The court also maintained that Assange's self sought and voluntary residency at the Ecuadorian Embassy cannot be regarded as a deprivation of liberty.

Assange's lawyer has informed that the district courts decision will be appealed.

Assangeistas, Eat Your Hearts Out

The World Justice Project (WJP) has recently issued its annual report for 2012, the WJP Rule of Law Index® 2012.

The WJP Rule of Law Index is an innovative quantitative assessment tool designed by the World Justice Project offering a detailed and comprehensive picture of the extent to which countries adhere to the rule of law in practice. It provides original data regarding a variety of dimensions of the rule of law, enabling the assessment of a nation’s adherence to the rule of law in practice, identify a nation’s strengths and weaknesses in comparison to similarly situated countries, and track changes over time.

The results show that Sweden, contrary to the claims made by suspected rapist Julian Assange and his cohorts and supporters (the Assangeistas), actually is a country that ranks among the highest in the world (often among the Top 3 and always among the Top 10) in all factors and subfactors that are indexed in the report. You can download the full report for 2012 here and there is a cool interactive map here.

Criminal Justice

Sweden´s  overall scores & rankings

The Ecuadorian Farce

Rafael Correa, President of the Republic of Ecuador

The concepts of "political asylum" and "political refugee" are relatively well defined in International Law and precedence. The concepts are to be used for persons needing protection from persecution due to race, nationality, religion, political opinions and membership and/or participation in any particular social group or social activities. Sexual persecution has also come to be accepted in some countries as a legitimate category for asylum claims, when the person can prove that the state of origin is unable or unwilling to provide protection.

The Ecuadorian interpretation making Julian Assange, suspected of rape and other sexual crimes in Sweden, a human rights activist and offering him political asylum on the grounds that he would be wrongfully persecuted if he were sent to Sweden for inquiry and possible trial for his crimes is an abuse of the concepts.

It is not at all strange that this decision has now caused a diplomatic farce between Ecuador, on one hand, and Sweden, United Kingdom and Australia, on the other.

So with this decision Assange now prolongs his voluntary house arrest another few years, possibly even longer than the prison time he would have gotten if he had been tried and convicted by a Swedish court in a timely manner without all the obstructions.

Interesting Twist, Julian

Susan Benn, from the Julian Assange Defence Fund, addresses the media
outside the Ecuadorean embassy. Photograph: Lefteris Pitarakis/AP

Julian Assange delivered a statement to the press yesterday, through a spokesperson outside the Ecuadorean embassy in London, in which he, among other things, said:

"Although it is normal procedure, Swedish authorities have refused, without reason, to make the three hour trip to London and to interview Julian causing him to be trapped in the UK under virtual house arrest for 561 days and an additional 10 days in solitary confinement – all without charge. Instead they have issued an Interpol red notice and extradition requests."

---
Nice try Julian, but you get no bananas from me. You cannot blame this on either the prosecutor Mrs. Marianne Ny or Sweden, because it is all your own fault by the course of action you have chosen. 

It is up to the prosecutor to decide in what manner to best conduct the investigation and if it is possible and suitable for the full investigation of the alleged crimes to question a suspect abroad. It is never a right for the suspected criminal to ask for special treatment or to tell the prosecutor how to do her job.

Read the full article guardian.co.uk; Julian Assange to sit out standoff over extradition at Ecuadorean embassy.

Galloping Paranoia Analyzed

Photo: Matt Dunham/Scanpix

As I am temporarily suffering from a mild bout of "rainbow overdose", I will try to direct your interest towards this interesting article by Nick Cohen, which was published on guardian.co.uk on Sunday; Nick Cohen: Definition of paranoia: supporters of Julian Assange.

Some of Assange's supporters say that the women have no right to put allegations of sexual abuse before a competent court. Instead, they denounce them as "feminazis" in language so extreme that the women's lawyer said his clients were "the victims of a crime, but they are looked upon as the perpetrators". I doubt that posterity will recall much that Assange said. But it ought to remember his assertion that "Sweden is the Saudi Arabia of feminism". In one sentence, Assange encapsulated the special pleading and misogyny of a rotten "progressive" culture.

Justice Denied

guardian.co.uk has interviewed the legal representative of the two Swedish women in the Assange-investigation and give us the following report: Julian Assange asylum move is ´a tragedy´ for his accusers, says lawyer (url full interview) :

"Julian Assange's decision to seek asylum in Ecuador is "a tragedy" for the two women who have accused him of sexual assault in Sweden, their lawyer has said.

Claes Borgström, who represents the two unnamed women with whom the WikiLeaks founder had sexual relations in Stockholm in August 2010, told the Guardian the women were frustrated and disappointed by Assange's decision to seek asylum rather than face investigation in Sweden over claims of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion.

"They are disappointed, but they are getting used to this by now," said Borgström, who has represented the women throughout Assange's sequence of appeals against extradition in the British courts.

"They know that all they can do is wait. I have told them I am not sure, but I think he will still be extradited … it is a tragedy for the women. I don't know how long it will take for him to be extradited now. Victims want to put these things behind them in order to be able to get on with their lives. The tragedy is that he doesn't take his responsibility. He should have come to Sweden."

...

I totally agree with Mr. Borgström, justice delayed is justice denied for the two women.

Given the constant problem with most sexual crime allegations, that there are only two people present with conflicting versions of what occurred,  this may be a difficult case for the prosecutor to gather enough proof to bring charges against Assange and then to get him convicted by a court of law. I - like everyone else - do not yet know what supporting evidence the prosecutor may be in possession of. Delays are usually not at all helpful in crime investigations.

Swedish Government Web-pages are Down (Updated)(Update)

I have been trying to reach the Swedish governments web-pages (www.regeringen.se and others) during the last hour or so but cannot get connected with it. I have also tried getting to the different ministries without luck.

Is this a hacker attack by Assangistas?

Update
As you can read in the comments to this post the lairds CTO, Mrs. Vampi Twine-DeSantis-McMillan-McMillan (honorary), says she has no problems at all reaching the website.

However I still cannot reach the government website or those of the ministries. Of course it is entirely possible that the government has decided to shut me out but...  Could Vampi be a CIA-agent? (Go away, paranoia!)

I would appreciate if you could tell me in comments if you have a problem reaching the website www.regeringen.se or not. Thanks in advance!

Update 2
Thanks to those of you who tried to help out. Its obviously NOT a hacker attack but some malfunction on my end.

After uninstalling and re-installing my Internet Security program, my anti-virus program, my Chrome, my Firefox etc. and clearing out every conceivable cache, I must report I still cannot access the government websites in either Firefox, Google Chrome or IE. I´ll see if i have the stamina to worry about it in the morning.

Political Asylum

The embassy of the Republic of Ecuador to the United Kingdom today issued the following statement:

"This afternoon Mr Julian Assange arrived at the Ecuadorian Embassy seeking political asylum from the Ecuadorian government. We have immediately passed his application on to the relevant department in Quito. While the department assesses Mr Assange's application, Mr Assange will remain at the embassy, under the protection of the Ecuadorian government. (...) The decision to consider Mr Assange's application for protective asylum should in no way be interpreted as Ecuador interfering in the judicial processes of either the United Kingdom or Sweden."

Read the full report by Beatrice Woolf of the guardian.co.uk, "Julian Assange seeking asylum in Ecuadorian embassy in London." (url)
---

Another imaginative and interesting development in this case to further delay the investigation into the criminal charges complaints for rape and sexual molestation made against Assange by two Swedish women. 

Go Away, Julian

Photo by Stefan Wermuth/Reuters

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom has unanimously dismissed the application on behalf of Julian Assange to re-open the case in the court.

You can read the judgment in full here; Application to re-open appeal.

The fact that the court handed down it´s judgement only two days after receiving it and calling it "without merit" in the language code of courts in effect means "Fuck you, now go away and stop wasting our valuable time with your bullshit!"

To give Assange time to appeal the previous ruling by the Court on May 30, 2012, 20 the European Court of Human Rights, the Court decided that the extradition should not commence until after July 28, 2012. The European Court has also announced that if an application should arrive, they can be expected to deal with it within a fortnight.

The Swedish police and other security forces have reportedly stepped up their vigilance in preparation of expected Internet-attacks on Swedish government institutions.

(For all my other posts on this please click Assange in the tags below.)

Assange Loses Extradition Appeal But...

Photograph: Geoff Caddick/AFP/Getty Images

guardian.co.uk today reports:

"Julian Assange has lost his appeal against extradition to Sweden at the supreme court.
By a majority of five to two, the justices decided that a public prosecutor was "judicial authority" and that therefore his arrest warrant had been lawfully issued.

But lawyers for the WikiLeaks founder submitted an urgent request to the supreme court asking for permission to challenge one of the points made in the judgment.

Assange, who is facing charges of sexual assault and rape, was not in court. There was no legal requirement for him to be present. According to his solicitor, Gareth Peirce, he was stuck in traffic

The court granted Assange's lawyers 14 days to present their arguments that crucial issues related to Article 31 of the Vienna convention, on which the majority of the justices based their decision, were not raised during the hearing.

Assange's lawyers can also, at the same time, begin the process of appealing against the judgment to the European court of human rights in Strasbourg."

---

So we have another delay, even if this last emergency application hinges on a crucial legal point in all democracies. No one should be judged on grounds that the involved parties haven´t been able to discuss in the case. If it is true, it would be a bit tragicomic that such a fundamental mistake is made in a high-profile case by the finest judges, but shit does happen...

Bock, Whats Your Beef With Assange?

As I have written more than a few posts on Julian Assange and the extradition circus, that is now in its final stages, I have sometimes been asked by friends - and others - what I have against Assange or for that matter WikiLeaks.

Conversations in IM chats have their difficulties and many facts get lost, overlooked or forgotten, so I thought I should try to summarize my points of view on some of the issues debated.

Before starting I would like to emphatically stress the fact that everything as yet is based on what has been reported in the media coverage of the matters which are not always the most reliable sources. At the present time Julian Assange is only wanted for questioning by the Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny on charges made against him. Assange has not been indicted and is far from condemned by a court of law.

1. WikiLeaks
I firmly and wholeheartedly admire and support the work that WikiLeaks has done, is doing and hopefully will continue to do. I also admire Assange for his co-founding of this organisation.

In my mind every healthy society - and the world community as a whole - needs to be informed about the wheeling and dealing and misdoings of the powers that be, especially in foreign policy and military matters.

Whistle-blowing, i.e. people passing on secret information to the press, is a fundamental and inherent part of a democratic society and are essential for a free press. However, sometimes information alone is not enough as this can be swept aside as hearsay or speculation. In these cases the press has to be supplied with corroborating documentation to prove the case. Passing on classified documents is however a crime in most countries, even when - as in Sweden - the passing of information itself is allowed and supported by the constitution.

My only objections to WikiLeaks is that the organization should try even harder to protect their sources so  they do not risk criminal charges and - perhaps - also should try evaluating if, when and in what form the publishing of certain information and documents could put human lives or liberty at risk.

2. Rape or not?
I was raised to believe that women and men are equal, with full and equal human rights. As a part of this I also fundamentally believe that no one is allowed to force sex on anyone else without prior consent. It is also my belief that any consent to sexual activity can be given with whatever limitations a woman or man sees fit, even if the limitation should be that the one penetrating them should use a condom.

If anyone then with disregard of the limitation stated  proceeds to have sexual activity with someone else the ensuing act is done without consent.

Sex without consent is correctly named rape. Rape is a crime in most countries.

Assange´s supporters, among these most notably John Pilger (Australian journalist and documentary filmmaker) and Michael Moore (American documentary filmmaker) have both embarked on a crusade to vilify the two Swedish women and the Swedish system of justice. Their main arguments seemingly being that this is not the usual violent street-rape and that Sweden is acting in cahoots with the United States military complex in getting at the, in their mind, lily white Assange.

3. Is Assange a rapist?
Hell, I don´t know and neither does anyone else, except for Assange himself and the two Swedish women that have made the charges. It is precisely for that reason Sweden wants Assange to come to Sweden to answer the questions of the Swedish prosecutors. Admittedly there seems to be conflicting evidence but this is a matter for the prosecutor to evaluate and weigh before she decides if Assange should be indicted or not.

If the prosecutor should find that she does not have a strong enough case to get a verdict she will close the inquiry and Assange will be deemed innocent of all charges. Should the prosecutor however decide that there is enough proof to indict Assange the cases will go to trial and all the proofs in the cases will be laid before the Swedish courts, by both the prosecution and the defense.

Before the final judgement of the courts has been made in these cases none of us can know a damn thing about whether or not Assange is guilty of any crimes or not.

Suspected Criminal Turns Politician

Photo by Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP

The guardian.co.uk website reports;

"The WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange plans to run for a seat in Australia's senate next year despite being under virtual house arrest in the UK and facing sex crime allegations (actually two counts of suspected rape, my comment) in Sweden.

The 40-year-old Australian citizen has taken his legal battle against extradition all the way to Britain's supreme court, which is expected to rule on his case soon."

Read the full article here: guardian.co.uk; Julian Assange  to run for Australian senate.

---
Well, I am sure this will not be the first time in history that a suspected criminal enters politics. It should come as no surprise to anyone that I am not wishing him any luck in this endeavor.

Career Opportunity

Well, well, I got a semi-anonymous tip, from someone whom I choose to call "Idde", directing my attention to a post at Joe Jervis´s exceptional blog Joe.My.God. that I somehow had overlooked earlier.

It seems like my second most favorite suspected villain Julian Assange has now found new and creative ways to work from his house arrest in Britain, where he is awaiting the judgement of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom on his possible extradition to Sweden (where he is to be interrogated on suspicion of two counts of rape).

LiIVE: UK Supreme Court, Part 2

Today the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom continues it´s hearing at 10.30-16.00 GMT (02.30-08.00 AM SLT) in the case of Julian Assange (Appellant) v. The Swedish Judicial Authority(Respondent) concerning his extradition to Sweden.

The issue that is to be heard is"whether a European Arrest Warrant (“EAW”) issued by a public prosecutor is a valid Part 1 EAW issued by a “judicial authority” for the purpose and within the meaning of sections 2 and 66 of the Extradition Act 2003."

You can follow the proceedings here. (Url)

For additional information see my previous post LIVE: UK Supreme Court Hears Assange

LIVE: UK Supreme Court hears Assange

On February 1 and 2, 2012, at 10.30-16.00 GMT (02.30-08.00 AM SLT) you can see the live broadcast from the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom hearing in the case of Julian Assange (Appellant) v. The Swedish Judicial Authority (Respondent) concerning his extradition to Sweden.

The issue that is to be heard is "whether a European Arrest Warrant (“EAW”) issued by a public prosecutor is a valid Part 1 EAW issued by a “judicial authority” for the purpose and within the meaning of sections 2 and 66 of the Extradition Act 2003."

You can follow the proceedings here. (Url)

Background (from the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

"The appellant, Julian Assange, is the founder of Wikileaks. Assange is the subject of a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) issued by the Swedish Prosecution Authority, which sets out allegations of four offences of unlawful coercion and sexual misconduct, including rape. Assange surrendered himself for arrest in the UK and, following a hearing, his extradition to Sweden was ordered. Assange appealed to the Divisional Court against his extradition on four grounds. He lost on all four grounds and the order requiring his extradition was upheld.

The High Court refused Assange permission to appeal to the Supreme Court but certified one issue raised by his case as being of ‘general public importance’. The Supreme Court subsequently granted permission to appeal on this issue.

... 

In certifying this issue, the High Court made clear its view that Assange’s chances of success in the Supreme Court are ‘extraordinarily slim’. Should this appeal fail, his only further remedy is to apply to the European Court of Human Rights, which will reply within 14 days stating whether it accepts the case. If the ECtHR agrees to hear the case, Assange will remain in the UK on his current bail conditions while the matter is decided. If the ECtHR declines to hear the case, he will be extradited to Sweden to face trial."