Showing posts with label WikiLeaks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label WikiLeaks. Show all posts

Saturday, April 13, 2019

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Embassy asked British Police to assist them in removing Assange from their premises after his political asylum had been revoked by the Ecuadorian President.

In the video below president Lenin Moreno, explains why the asylum was revoked.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

Friday, May 19, 2017

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. 

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Will Assange Keep Promise?


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.

Wednesday, July 16, 2014

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.

Wednesday, May 30, 2012

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...

Sunday, March 18, 2012

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.

Saturday, March 17, 2012

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.

Sunday, December 18, 2011

Assange to be heard by UK Supreme Court

Photograph: Lefteris Pitarakis/AP
guardian.co.uk informed us on Friday that the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom has granted Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, permission to appeal against extradition to Sweden, where he faces sex crimes allegations.

The issue that the Supreme Court will decide on is "whether a prosecutor is a judicial authority".

Wouldn't it be amusing if the Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny, after having the opportunity to question Julian Assange (when he has finally been sent over) decides that she doesn't have enough to substantiate a prosecution on the charges made.

The hearing has been scheduled for two days beginning on February 1st, 2012,

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Assange Loses Appeal


guardian.co.uk today informs us that the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, has lost his high court appeal against extradition to Sweden to face rape allegations.

Lord Justice Thomas and Mr Justice Ouseley on Wednesday handed down their judgment in the 40-year-old Australian's appeal against a European arrest warrant issued by Swedish prosecutors after rape and sexual assault accusations made by two Swedish women following his visit to Stockholm in August 2010.

The judges rejected the appeal on all four grounds made by his legal team, opening up the possibility that Assange could be removed to Sweden by the end of the month.

Lord Justice Thomas said a date would be fixed in three weeks' time to hear any case by Assange that he should be allowed to take the case to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.

To appeal again, Assange must persuade the judges there is a wider issue of "public importance" at stake in the latest decision. If he is successful in persuading the high court of that, he is likely to remain on conditional bail until a hearing in front of the supreme court. This is unlikely to take place until next year.

If he is denied the right to appeal then British law enforcement officers will be responsible for arranging his removal to Sweden within 10 days.

You can read Robert Booth´s full article here guardian.co.uk: Julian Assange loses appeal against extradition.


P.S. The picture pf Mr.. Assange was updated after the correct information supplied by my buddy Apmel in the comments.

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Date Set for Assange´s Appeal Hearing

guardian.co.uk today informs us that Julian Assange, co-founder of WikiLeaks, has now been given a date for his appeal hearing against extradition to Sweden, where he faces allegations of sexual assault.

The two-day hearing will take place at the high court in London beginning on July 12th, 2011.

Assange is appealing against a ruling by Judge Howard Riddle at Belmarsh magistrates' court in south London that extradition would not breach his human rights. Riddle dismissed all of Assange's arguments that he could not get a fair trial and rejected his claim that extradition to Sweden would violate his human rights.

Assange has said he fears extradition to Sweden could be a stepping stone to him being sent to the US to stand trial on fresh charges relating to WikiLeaks, and that he could even face the death penalty. Assange described the ruling as "rubber stamping" and the result of a "European arrest warrant system run amok". He denies the allegations against him and believes they were politically motivated, particularly after WikiLeaks' publication of leaked American diplomatic cables that rocked the US government.

If his appeal is unsuccessful, Assange could take his case to the supreme court, the United Kingdoms highest court, guardian.co.uk says.

Thursday, February 24, 2011

Circus Assange continued

WikiLeaks cofounder Julian Assange should be extradited to Sweden for questioning and possible trial on charges of rape and sexual assault, the British judge Howard Riddle decided in a ruling today.

Riddle said the Swedish prosecutors' request that Assange be handed over was valid and reasonable for their investigation into allegations that he sexually abused two women last August.

The defense team has left no stone unturned in this extradition hearing. They have argued that Swedish prosecutors did not have the authority to issue the European arrest warrant and that what Assange is alleged to have done would not count as serious crimes under British law. Assange's attorneys also called a witness who portrayed the chief prosecutor in the case as a radical feminist with a vendetta against men. Furthermore, the defense argued that Assange would not receive a fair trial in Sweden, where rape trials are usually held behind closed doors and where, defense lawyers said, adverse publicity surrounding the case would prejudice the outcome.

But the judge dismissed all those arguments. Riddle said the arrest warrant was procedurally correct and properly issued. Having sex with someone while she was asleep "would amount to rape" in Britain also. And as for the media attention and remarks in the press about the case, the judge decided "I am absolutely satisfied that no such comments will have any impact on the decisions of the courts, either here or in Sweden."

Assange, who denies the accusations, has seven days to lodge an appeal which should probably drag out the case at least a few more months.

Sunday, February 13, 2011

Circus Assange

It´s been an interesting week following Circus Assange.

The extradition hearings that have taken place in London have given Julian Assange, his defense-team and his supporters ample opportunity to try to muddy the waters by conjuring up one objection after another against Swedish justice, Swedish judges and prosecutors and Swedish laws.

Sweden is not some 'hell-hole' with a dodgy legal system. Sweden is a democratic country, we have an independent judiciary and prosecutors that are independent from the ruling powers. Sweden is in fact a nation under the rule of law, we do not have "kangaroo courts" or a feminist lobby deciding the outcome of court cases.

The Swedish rape-laws are much the same as the British, the key word is "consent" not whether a condom has been used during penetration or not (sigh). We believe in the right of everyone - man or woman - to chose with whom we want to have sex, when and under what circumstances. If consent has been given it cannot be taken back after the fact (deeper sigh). Whether or not a condom has been used does not constitute rape.

Claims have been made against Assange by two young Swedish women. The claims have to be investigated by the Swedish prosecutors. Assange should be willing to assist with that investigation. He will of course have the right not to answer any questions that he believes would incriminate him in anyway whatsoever.

If the prosecutor after the investigation finds that there are reasons to believe that the claims are enough to bring charges against Assange she has to do so. After that it is up to the court to decide if - given all the evidence and facts that has been presented to the court during the course of the trial - if it finds that the prosecution has fulfilled it´s burden to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt.

Assange claims he is innocent and also says that he has the evidence to prove it, despite not knowing what the allegations him are as he hasn't been charged yet..

By appearing to be willing to use any legal maneuvers to avoid coming to Sweden Assange is giving the appearance of knowing that he is guilty of the allegations. He will loose a lot of support by this.

...and all the while this circus is going on the two women are vilified and harassed with their names, pictures and tweets posted all over the Internet by members of the media, the John Pilger´s, the Naomi Wolf´s and the Naomi Klein´s of this world and all the rest of the "Based on what I have read in the press, on the Internet or on the bathroom-walls I so feel that this must be a conspiracy and the charges must be trumped up"-mob.

Oh by the way, Sweden cannot extradite a person to another country without the prior consent of the country that has extradited that person to Sweden, neither can Sweden ever extradite anyone to a country where they risk the death penalty.

But hell, I don´t know why I waste my time, this is no longer about facts, it has become a religion with Julian as God. 

WikiLeaks has my support all the way, but the organization´s co-founder Julian Assange has lost it.