LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 04-13-2019, 03:19 PM   #16
ChuangTzu
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2015
Location: Where ever needed
Distribution: Slackware/Salix while testing others
Posts: 1,210

Rep: Reputation: 1081Reputation: 1081Reputation: 1081Reputation: 1081Reputation: 1081Reputation: 1081Reputation: 1081Reputation: 1081

Quote:
Originally Posted by hazel View Post
I must admit that I'm in two minds about this. On the one hand, Assange is a useful whistleblower and, as such, ought to be protected against extradition to the US. He is not an American citizen and was not on American soil when the alleged hacking offences were committed so I don't see what claim the US can have against him in international law. If they did have such a claim, they would have it against any journalist in the world who reported something embarrassing about them.

I don't accept the argument that if he were extradited to America only on the suggested charges, the punishment would be trivial. Once he was on American soil, they could bring any additional charges they liked. Charging him with only a minor offence initially could well be a deliberate ploy to get around the well-known British distaste for extraditing hackers.
Excellent point and I think that could be the goal for some of the politicians. Assange opened a can of worms that exposes just about every politician in the world, and quite a few business leaders as well.

On the other hand, I have heard it mentioned that perhaps he will be used as a material witness in the upcoming investigations into Bill and Hillary Clinton, Clinton Foundation, Barrack Obama, Eric Holder, War crimes by Bush's and Obama, et all... Time will tell I suppose.

Quote:
On the other hand, the Swedish allegations need to be investigated. You cannot support a movement like #metoo and at the same time ignore claims by a woman who may have been sexually assaulted simply because the man she accuses is a popular left-wing hero. Assange claims that if he were extradited to Sweden, the Swedes would send him on to America. The UK has a record of standing up to the US on matters like this and Sweden does not. Well, if that is the case, perhaps a Lockerbie-type solution could be agreed on: set up a Swedish court to try him here.
We also cannot allow the #metoo movement to turn into a movement to easily take down any man anywhere in the world. Proof should be provided, verifiable, irrefutable proof before any arrests and charges filed. So far most #metoo cases have been dropped or dismissed and unfortunately, given the nature of the 24 hour news cycle, reputations have been permanently ruined/tarnished as a result. Rules need to be setup for these types of claims, statute of limitations etc...

Ref: https://www.usnews.com/news/world/ar...julian-assange
https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...-investigation
 
Old 04-14-2019, 01:44 AM   #17
ondoho
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 11,308
Blog Entries: 8

Rep: Reputation: 2934Reputation: 2934Reputation: 2934Reputation: 2934Reputation: 2934Reputation: 2934Reputation: 2934Reputation: 2934Reputation: 2934Reputation: 2934Reputation: 2934
I just had to look up the term shill.
interesting; such a short, yet very complex and meaningful word. much needed in the world wide web (although the word itself is of course much older).

this is not to take sides in the dsicussion here!
really just interested in the word itself and vocabulary emerging to explain complex new situations.
 
Old 04-15-2019, 04:59 AM   #18
cynwulf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,226
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389
Quote:
Originally Posted by hazel View Post
...the man she accuses is a popular left-wing hero.
I don't regard Assange as a "left-wing hero". I'm not sure what Assange's politics are, but as far as I know he is a typical "hacker" (in the film terminology), started out as a hacker and is the founder of wikileaks.

It's important to note that Assange did not commit any crime in the US, he merely received what was provided by Manning and also passed that onto some national newspapers in the US, UK and Germany.
 
Old 04-15-2019, 06:11 AM   #19
hazel
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2016
Location: Harrow, UK
Distribution: LFS, AntiX, Slackware
Posts: 2,784
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442
When I said "left-wing hero" I was not referring to Assange's personal politics but to the way the liberal left has taken him up -- rather odd when you consider the role Wikileaks played in getting Trump elected! Dianne Abbot is practically ready to kiss his boots and is prepared to totally ignore the rape allegations.
 
Old 04-15-2019, 06:43 AM   #20
cynwulf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,226
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389
Allegations are allegations and nothing more. Rhetoric, likely lifted straight from right wing tabloids is not tantamount to facts.

Thus far, the Labour consensus is that the Swedish allegations aren't magically going away, but that the extradition to the US is about the leaked files, via Manning and that he should not be extradited. I'm in agreement with that, as there is no justification and it sets a dangerous precedent.

I'm not sure sure how some have put these together. Or do you consider that it's correct to be extradited to the US for sex crimes in Sweden?

I see no problem with him going to Sweden to face the remaining charges, but there would need to be a guarantee from Sweden that he would not be extradited to the US.
 
Old 04-15-2019, 07:05 AM   #21
hazel
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2016
Location: Harrow, UK
Distribution: LFS, AntiX, Slackware
Posts: 2,784
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442Reputation: 1442
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynwulf View Post
I'm not sure sure how some have put these together. Or do you consider that it's correct to be extradited to the US for sex crimes in Sweden?

I see no problem with him going to Sweden to face the remaining charges, but there would need to be a guarantee from Sweden that he would not be extradited to the US.
It looks as though you have not read my original post carefully enough. I specifically pointed out that these are two different matters and that you should not automatically assume a position on one because of what you believe about the other. That is precisely what a lot of liberal left wing folk are doing. Assange is a whistleblower, ergo Assange is a hero, ergo Assange could not possibly be guilty of rape. But you can defend a man against a threat of extradition to the US without turning a blind eye to possible sexual misbehaviour.

Yes, allegations are only allegations. But the answer to that is not to ignore them (which could lead to genuine victims being betrayed) but to try them in court. That will show whether there is any truth in them. Let a jury decide. And if Sweden cannot be trusted to protect a man from an unlawful extradition request, then he should be tried in the UK. If he is found guilty, he can serve his sentence here too.
 
Old 04-15-2019, 07:35 AM   #22
cynwulf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,226
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389
Quote:
Originally Posted by hazel View Post
It looks as though you have not read my original post carefully enough. I specifically pointed out that these are two different matters and that you should not automatically assume a position on one because of what you believe about the other. That is precisely what a lot of liberal left wing folk are doing. Assange is a whistleblower, ergo Assange is a hero, ergo Assange could not possibly be guilty of rape.
I don't know anyone who is taking such a position / making such assumptions.

From my perspective, Assange isn't a "hero" to anyone, unless you're referring to a tiny minority? By any twist of the imagination, he's not some martyr or mascot for the left - but possibly is someone to be admired by "libertarians" or freedom of speech activists, I don't know... but that transcends traditional left/right politics.

Labour have said he should not be extradited to the US - the right wing media (search for yourself) have as ever, through some journalistic magic, managed to come up with "ignoring" the rape allegations. And you've now managed to come here posting about people kissing feet...
Quote:
Originally Posted by hazel View Post
But you can defend a man against a threat of extradition to the US without turning a blind eye to possible sexual misbehaviour.
Again: Innocent until proven guilty. Assange has claimed all along that he has been in refuge at the Ecuadorian embassy, because if he were to leave, the US would apply to extradite him - he's now been vindicated, wouldn't you agree?

This would be no different to someone seeking political asylum - the would not be deported to a third country on the basis of some unproven allegations originating abroad. Those allegations would not be factored into that decision as they might prejudice that decision.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hazel View Post
And if Sweden cannot be trusted to protect a man from an unlawful extradition request, then he should be tried in the UK. If he is found guilty, he can serve his sentence here too.
He cannot be tried in the UK. He's not even a UK citizen - but aside from that, defendants are tried in the countries in which they commit their crimes. I don't feel this needs explanation.

Last edited by cynwulf; 04-15-2019 at 07:39 AM.
 
Old 04-15-2019, 07:39 AM   #23
Turbocapitalist
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Distribution: Linux Mint, Devuan, OpenBSD
Posts: 3,856
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 1817Reputation: 1817Reputation: 1817Reputation: 1817Reputation: 1817Reputation: 1817Reputation: 1817Reputation: 1817Reputation: 1817Reputation: 1817Reputation: 1817
Quote:
Yes, allegations are only allegations. But the answer to that is not to ignore them
The Swedish investigation was concluded years ago and the prosecutor found no grounds to proceed especially since neither woman was intending to file charges, closed the case, and gave Assange permission to leave the country. A new prosecutor got wind of his departure and re-opened the case, issuing a highly irregular alert for his arrest. Also out of form was the new prosecutor's refusal to do the interview either on site in the UK or over the phone, both of which were acceptable practices in use in both Sweden and the UK. There was a lot written about that case early on, when it was closed the first time, but memories are short and his opponents have been doing a M$ style saturate, diffuse, confuse attack on the public via a willing media. This circus is just another example of how finely tuned social control media is towards spreading disinformation.
 
Old 04-15-2019, 07:42 AM   #24
cynwulf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,226
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389Reputation: 1389
Absolutely spot on with the above.

And once again: As soon as the Met police apprehend Assange from the embassy - the US apply for extradition, the Swedish prosecutor considers reopening the case and the onslaught of negative press from the UK, Tory backed, media resumes in earnest. But no, all coincidence of course...
 
Old 04-15-2019, 08:50 AM   #25
jsbjsb001
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Earth? I would say I hope so but I'm not so sure about that... I could just be a figment of your imagination too.
Distribution: CentOS at the time of this writing, but some others over the years too...
Posts: 2,621

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1315Reputation: 1315Reputation: 1315Reputation: 1315Reputation: 1315Reputation: 1315Reputation: 1315Reputation: 1315Reputation: 1315Reputation: 1315
I was going to post pretty much the same thing you did Turbo, you beat me to it.

Anyhow, I found the follow article last night, doing a bit of research about it;

Quote:
Originally Posted by https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-14/julian-assange-to-be-interviewed-over-allegations-sexual-assault/8021186
In 2010 Miss A and Miss W got in touch with each other after the alleged sexual assaults took place, compared stories and went to the police. Soon after the Swedish prosecutor issued an arrest warrant for Mr Assange.

He was questioned by police and the arrest warrant was cancelled.

The Director of Public Prosecutions, Marianne Ny, then ordered that the investigation be reopened.

Why was he not interviewed until November 2016?

Mr Assange insists he has been available for interview in London for the last six years.

In 2010, the prosecutor in charge of the case, Marianne Ny, said Swedish law prevented her from questioning anyone by video link or in the London embassy. She later admitted it was legally possible, but refused to budge, saying that questioning him in the embassy "would lower the quality of the interview".

In March 2015, Ms Ny changed her mind and said she was willing to interrogate Mr Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
As far as the extradition request by the US is concerned, it also seems very, very suspect that almost (if not) the minute Assange was arrested, the US filed an extradition request. It seems to me the British Police tipped off the US that they were about to arrest him, allowing time for the US to put in their extradition request. The timing is just too suspect to me personally.

As far as Assange himself is concerned, while personally I don't like or hate him, from the history I know of him; he's someone who seems to have always been interested in "getting the truth out there", from a young age, as well as being an "activist", anti-war, into computers/hacking, etc. His mother from what I understand was an "anti-war activist", which is likely where he got that kind of sentiment from, being exposed to it from a young age.

As far as I can see, the US has not made a public case to have Assange extradited. They have not provided any proof I've seen or heard of, that says Assange is anymore guilty than you're average "journalist" - not saying Assange is necessarily one himself. There most certainly IS a very real risk that he could be extradited from Sweden to the US, if he was extradited to Sweden. He did warn of this very scenario himself, he currently finds himself in - it's now happened.
 
Old 04-15-2019, 11:08 AM   #26
DavidMcCann
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: London
Distribution: CentOS, Xubuntu
Posts: 5,220

Rep: Reputation: 1779Reputation: 1779Reputation: 1779Reputation: 1779Reputation: 1779Reputation: 1779Reputation: 1779Reputation: 1779Reputation: 1779Reputation: 1779Reputation: 1779
Quote:
Originally Posted by hazel View Post
He is not an American citizen and was not on American soil when the alleged hacking offences were committed so I don't see what claim the US can have against him in international law.

I don't accept the argument that if he were extradited to America only on the suggested charges, the punishment would be trivial. Once he was on American soil, they could bring any additional charges they liked.
Extradition is nothing to do with international law, but with national law and bi-lateral treaties. His extradition to the USA would be certainly covered by the relevant treaty between the UK and the USA. I'm not so happy about extraditing for a crime not committed in the country making the request, but I do see the rationale in the case of computer crime. If some-one hacks a computer in the USA, the fact that he was sitting at a desk in Sweden or where-ever seems irrelevant.

He could not be subject to additional charges. The extradition rules are quite strict, and the USA will have to give a binding undertaking not to do that, just as they undertake not to execute murderers extradited from the UK.
 
  


Reply

Tags
assange, free speech, truth, wikileaks


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Assange - What do you think ? Believe it or not ? ceyx General 6 03-24-2014 02:21 PM
LXer: Assange on the Run: Going Nowhere for Now LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 08-17-2012 05:00 AM
Julian Assange Arrested alan_ri General 0 12-07-2010 05:53 AM
EMBASSY Trust Suite causes GRUB error 17 donvitopt Linux - Newbie 2 08-02-2009 06:54 PM
My web server has been hacked. SU password has been disabled rcrosoer Linux - Security 11 06-27-2008 02:18 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:00 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration