Kim Dotcom: Julian Assange Will Be Hillary Clinton’s Worst Nightmare in 2016

[coyote]

From May 14, 2015

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-05-14/kim-dotcom-julian-assange-will-be-hillary-clinton-s-worst-nightmare-in-2016

I am wonder if his prediction is starting to come true.

Assange just release an 88Gb insurance torrent file that many are assuming are files on Clinton. time will tell.

[geek tragedy]

1. Tick tock. nt

[AgingAmerican]

9. Skinner has no power outside of DU

Putting DU's head in the sand doesn't change anything...

[stevenleser]

38. Assange won't affect the elections at all. nt

[AgingAmerican]

40. And you know this how?

????

[stevenleser]

42. 95% of voters don't know who he is and don't care. Nt

[AgingAmerican]

44. Irrelevant who has heard of him

Cuz it aint about him. Its about her and the media will be all ears.

[stevenleser]

46. Nope, its not irrelevant. What he says will never reach those folks. nt

[AgingAmerican]

48. Everyone knows what Wikileaks is

He was a news sensation for a solid year.

And again, it's not about him. It's about the information.

[stevenleser]

69. Nope, most folks don't and most folks don't care. nt

[rateyes]

106. Including you?

[Blanks]

152. Wikileaks was only in the news for so long...

Because Assange had engaged in unfavorable activities.

The story was more about HIM than what he brought out.

This story is from over a month ago, if there was something there, we'd have heard about it.

[senz]

67. Because the MSM is firmly under control? People will be kept in the dark?

Do you take pleasure in that? Do you really?

[glennward]

113. Because he never hacked her home server. Whatever he has is from government systems prone to being

hacked. What ever Assange has on Hillary he has had for some time and only Bernie Sanders and her usual haters care.

[Segami]

68. lol!

Clinton Theater is quite predictable and they will be calling on all to continue defending their lies for the next four years

[leeroysphitz]

134. Nobody knows Assange? That's why the Arab Spring never happened, I guess...

[pnwmom]

43. If he had anything important he would have already released it. n/t

[AgingAmerican]

45. Not necessarily, no.

[pnwmom]

49. He's milking the pre-publicity for all its worth. He wouldn't need to do that

if this were anything significant.

[woolldog]

62. Still waiting for teh "whitey" recording.

[scscholar]

97. This, just like with the FBI!

If they had something, both of them would have already done something.

[pnwmom]

108. Assange is not the FBI. He's an attention seeker. n/t

[Major Hogwash]

118. He's pretty good at what he does.

He's got my attention.

[Turin_C3PO]

76. I agree with much of your post

But I believe a far left government (obviously not Stalinist lol) would be miles better than a far right government. Oh and I do think the Bush Family has been pretty criminal. Some of their actions might have been legal but was certainly "evil" immoral stuff.

[Turin_C3PO]

79. I agree with those points.

Any government that views large sections of citizenry as enemies would be bad.

[rjsquirrel]

80. Thanks

Ultimately the right will fail for pursuing exactly that strategy. Donald Trump is its culmination and apotheosis.

[MrMickeysMom]

101. I need air freshener after that one...

Tomorrow I hope we will still have plenty of Clinton supporters willing to engage in appropriate respect for the remainder of this race.

Exit polls? What exit polls?

Julian Assange is an accused rapist... I see you full frontal insinuate guilt on a person accused when not proven, just the same. You think you'll fit in real well in the incremental universe where every opposing thought is stilled and stands at attention for the next spin?

[MrMickeysMom]

112. Threat much?

Why, yes.... You do that. And that stinks to high heaven, too. It's what has gotten so many of your posts hidden...

And, here you are, wondering what in the world you'll do in less than two hours.

Have yourself a good time.

[kstewart33]

78. Less than 24 hours remain.

Before nonsense like this post is banned.

[AgingAmerican]

81. Life will go on

Outside DU

[coco77]

88. I guess then we will ..

jump on board and start worshiping the Queen.

[laserhaas]

87. I imagine Skinner has an Administrative decision that is

Damned if you do...and Damned if you don't. His advertising revenue being the controlling factor.

Just wish he had bumped up the new system changes; but also pushed backed the timeline till the convention is over...for drawing his line in the sand.

Should I win my case and get back what Romney stole...I will try to assist

[Scurrilous]

2. Man fighting extradition says man fighting extradition says what?

[randome]

7. It must not be good news for DotCom. When they start feeling sad, they start lashing out.

[swhisper1]

20. extradition= must silence this individual at all costs- we cannot allow the truth

to hell with the 1st amendment

Only, Assange is not an American citizen. He merely dared to reveal hidden truths

[randome]

24. The moment he selectively edited the "Collateral Murder" video, he lost all respect.

Or at least he should have. Some of you seem to have a fervent need to believe in heroes no matter how poorly they behave.

[swhisper1]

58. heros? He is not a hero- he is an investigative journalist, a near extinct species

[randome]

66. Because he SAYS he's a journalist? So does James O'Keefe!

He publishes shit that other people steal for him! That's known as a 'fence'. He doesn't investigate shit.

[Scurrilous]

52. It goes like this...

Pretend to have dirt on the next POTUS (or be associated with someone who does) so that you can argue during your extradition hearing that sending you to the US may be a danger to your well being because, you know...Vince Foster! OMIGOD! Hillary is going to kill me!!1!

In Assange's case it's don't let bad old Sweden get their hands on me because they'll send me to the US and once again Kill! Kill!

Anything these extraditable fuckwits have to say is not to be taken seriously.

[swhisper1]

54. The US has absolutly no right to extradite a foreign citizen who broke no laws

I do not think he fears being killed,rather he fears being disappeared. Being killed or interred would make him a martyr and encourage more whistleblowing. Obama has no tolerance for exposure. The last person he fears is Hillary. She is a non-entity to europeans

[FreakinDJ]

3. Wikileaks already has a "Searchable Database" of Hillary's emails

[NWCorona]

15. These emails supposedly came from Guccifer 2.0

[swhisper1]

56. of released e-mail. yes now they may have the others. Assange did not say it is dirt, that is Hilbot

speak.

Assange only offers transparency, from which we can form our own opinions, Some will say they are harmless, others will connect the dots, some will use it against her. Better now than in the GE

[Adrahil]

4. So if Assange has all this dirt....

... Why didn't he release it during the primaries, instead of during the GE cycle? Does he want Trump to win?

My guess is this is another nothing burger.... Again. Remember when Guccifer was the beginning of the end?

[cali]

12. good point.

[SpareribSP]

19. Wikileaks usually does redactions.

If they just got this data and it's 88gb worth, it'll take time to process to make sure sensitive information isn't released that puts people in danger.

[NWCorona]

16. These were supposedly recently supplied to them.

But I agree. Put up or shut up.

[swhisper1]

17. duh- the primary is not over-its weeks away

I doubt Assange is interested in this election. He is just a professional whistleblower and he checks any data before revealing. His FBI informer probably did not get them to him earlier. The decision to block her TPP e-mails likely triggered this response.

The only one Assange might have revenge for is Obama, who is vicious against whistleblowers. Given the lack of transparency of TPP and NSA, and others, people like Assange are adored by many for his ethical whistleblowing.

Assange may have personal problems and arrogance, but no one disputes his findings. I applaud his efforts in revealing the coup currently being committed in the USA.

[Zorro]

22. Now there's a "coup" in the USA underway?

When will this idiocy end?

[Adrahil]

23. Assange is not a whistleblower.

A whistleblower is an insider who reveals information. He is a foreign national elicting the release of protected information, regardless of its consequences. He basically uses people like Chelsea Manning to feed his own ego and sense of self-importance.

He's got nothing. Just like Guccifer had nothing.

And yeah, the primaries ARE over. All us regular folk have cast our ballots. If he had something he wanted to release, the time would have been when it could affect peoples' votes. this is another fairy story for Sanders supporters who are hoping against hope that there will be some last sevond switcheroo. Seriously.... Not gonna happen.

[swhisper1]

25. sanders people have moved on

Assange is working to get Manning released, you are uninformed.

I do not want Bernie fettered by any office so I do not want him to be president- no one does. We just want our voices heard, the TPP stopped and equality.

Assange and my concerns are the voicing and revelations of hidden agendas by whoever, that will destroy the world, the world economy, and oppress the weak. The coup of this election is done, cannot be stopped this year, but exposure to truth will bring about awareness and the next rounds of elections around the world will be progressive and peaceful. It is this country that builds conflicts that lead to terrorism. Us and french cartoons.

As far as Guccifer, he sure is getting alot of attention from the FBI. I see him and all hackers and whistle blowers as an odd form of true patriot.

As far as Assange not being a whistleblower, that is not for you to say. He probably thinks as a citizen of the world, your description applies

[Adrahil]

34. Manning is not going to get released. And for good reason.

Regardless of her intentions, she released WAY more information than necessary to expose misdeeds. She put real people at risk, and worse, she probably didn't even know it. She was most certainly NOT aware of all the content she released to a foreign national. She will serve her time as she should.

And come on back when exactly NOTHING comes of the Guccifer "information." My guess is they are mainly interested in what he did to hack into the accounts he compromised, and to follow-up on his other contacts in the hacking world to nail them. You'll probably never hear about what he actually told them that they used.

And just to be clear, Fuck Assange, that self-important prick.

[swhisper1]

59. I guess we will know when we know. The unknowns we know cannot be known to civilians, for we know

that some facts known to the knowing must not reach the ears of the known people who know the unknown

[Metric System]

27. Not only that, but he never seems interested in exposing Russia. Wonder why?

[swhisper1]

60. Russia isnt hiding their intent, and in other than major cities, they are still using typewriters

and dont have cell towers so they cant call Wikileaks.

I havent a clue, in other words

[randome]

32. No, he's not. He's a fence who gets other people to steal stuff for him.

"Come to my organization and be a hero! I will push this button here to publish everything you steal!" Hasn't worked out well for many, has it?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

26. I don't think he has an agenda for the election

[CorkySt.Clair]

35. You mean posts like this nuttiness?

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/12511901751#post17




"17. Mark this day.
This is the day the MSM decided to begin to report on what is likely the biggest story in American politics since Watergate."

[swhisper1]

57. why do you assume it is dirt? Truth isnt always dirt

I want to know what she and Obama are hiding

[randome]

5. How many more times are you going to fall for the old "just you wait" routine?

Anyone with information that can swing an election would not pre-announce it! Unless they see life as a game show and their role as host.

[Squinch]

29. Every time Assange says it, these guys believe it. It's like Lucy and the football.

[Scurrilous]

53. LOL

Perfect!

[Squinch]

100. .

[NurseJackie]

144. It's tiresome, isn't it?

[Loki Liesmith]

6. I have nightmares about rapists too

[Octafish]

8. Didn't Washington make it illegal for Federal Employees to even look at WikiLeaks?

Seeing how they show inside crony dealing and war profiteering, it's understandable.



How often have we been told in world-weary tones that Wikileaks has revealed nothing new - especially by those who want to appear to be in the know? Here is an aide-mémoire of a few of the highest profile revelations.

by Ryan Gallagher
17 February 2011
OpenDemocracy.net

Since 2006, whistleblower website WikiLeaks ? has published a mass of information we would otherwise not have known. The leaks have exposed dubious procedures at Guantanamo Bay ? and detailed meticulously the Iraq War's unprecedented civilian death-toll ? . They have highlighted the dumping of toxic waste in Africa ? as well as revealed America's clandestine military actions in Yemen and Pakistan ? .

The sheer scope and significance of the revelations is shocking. Among them are great abuses of power, corruption, lies and war crimes. Yet there are still some who insist WikiLeaks has "told us nothing new". This collection, sourced from a range of publications across the web, illustrates nothing could be further from the truth. Here, if there is still a grain of doubt in your mind, is just some of what WikiLeaks has told us:

SNIP...

•The Obama administration worked with Republicans to protect Bush administration officials facing a criminal investigation into torture (see Mother Jones ? )

SNIP...

•More than 66,000 civilians suffered “violent deaths” in Iraq between 2004 and the end of 2009 (see the Telegraph ? )

CONTINUED with LINKS...

http://www.opendemocracy.net/ryan-gallagher/what-has-wikileaks-ever-taught-us-read-on

Gee. No wonder they want to shut up Assange and the Internet he rode in on.

PS: The picture above is of Jose Padilla in his sensory deprivation goggles.

[lapucelle]

10. Isn't Assange the accused rapist waiting out the statute of limitations in a safe haven?

To whom is he credible and why does he want to see Trump elected? What was he promised and who made the promise?

Either this is an attempt by an irrelevant accused criminal to regain relevancy or it is an attempt by an irrelevant accused criminal to advance the agenda of someone or some group that wants Trump elected. Assange was either promised something or he is being blackmailed.

And BTW, The State Department website has had a searchable archive of Mrs. Clinton's emails ever since the release began.

[swhisper1]

18. criminality has to be proven, and both women have recanted

His charges have absolutely no place in this discussion of whistleblowing. Prior data dumps have been proven out in the past. He is meticulous about fact checking, so drop the holier- than-thou distraction away from the topic. If you cannot discuss the threat of harmful data coming to light, then goodbye.

If you would bother to watch interviews with Assange, you would see his high intelligence and would never dream he is on Trumps side of any issue. In fact, all Europeans use Trump as an example of american stupidity. I couldnt agree with them more.

[randome]

31. SEE his high intelligence?

What about when he selectively edited the "Collateral Murder" video and tried to pass it off as authentic?

You're taken in my his charming good looks, I guess, just like the women who wanted to get laid by him and then regretted it.

It does not matter one whit how Sweden determines to prosecute this. Recantation of rape is like a wife's recantation of abuse: in some states in America, prosecution continues.

If it was anything else, then Assange could walk away free. Interpol, the Swedish prosecution, the Swedish appeals court, the U.K., the U.K. appeals court and Australia are all in on the plot to break their own laws and get Assange, if he's to be believed.

Not likely, to say the least.

[swhisper1]

33. I.m not discussing the allegations, do I have to repeat myself?

[lapucelle]

124. You don't have to discuss the rape charges.

That doesn't mean other people can't if they wish to.

[pnwmom]

50. They have not recanted. And he is avoiding a trial -- that is fact. n/t

[Hekate]

82. Gee. How come the Hill Haters never say that about Hillary?

Cuase they got nuttin but hate.

[VulgarPoet]

121. Isn't Clinton the woman who defended a rapist?

I'm just sayin', there's a bizarre commonality here. And in only one of the two cases I've presented has guilt yet to be established. Four words: "Innocent until proven guilty".

[lapucelle]

122. Only according to Trump surrogates and Sean Hannity.

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/

[1StrongBlackMan]

129. It wasn't just Hannity and trump surrogates ...

that apparent fiction found a home on DU for weeks.

[Scurrilous]

11. Couch surfer says what?

WikiLeaks: Julian Assange claims to have Rupert Murdoch 'insurance files'

<snip>

"Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, claimed today he was in possession of "insurance" files on Rupert Murdoch and his global media company, News Corporation."

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/jan/12/wikileaks-rupert-murdoch


What Dirt Does Wikileaks Have on Rupert Murdoch?

<snip>

"Julian Assange says he has loads of cables on Rupert Murdoch and Murdoch's News Corporation that will be automatically released if he meets an early demise. It's nice to see that the Wikileaks founder hasn't lost his melodramatic touch.

Assange says he's sitting on "insurance files" about Murdoch — State Department cables about the mogul and his company, plus, Assange seems to imply, dirt on a specific broadcaster (Fox News?): "There are 504 US embassy cables on one broadcasting organisation and there are cables on Murdoch and News Corp," he tells the New Statesman."

http://gawker.com/5732169/what-dirt-does-wikileaks-have-on-rupert-murdoch


"Loads of cables I tell ya'.." "LOADS!!1!"

[SidDithers]

13. ...

Sid

[Nye Bevan]

14. It's probably 88 gigs of random rantings about the British, the Swedish,

and the Americans, plus his complaints about the food at the Ecuadorian Embassy.

[mwrguy]

21. Two criminals making conspiratorial claims about Hillary

Slow news day.

[redstateblues]

84. LOL. Fevered dreams of Brocialists

[RandySF]

30. 1 more day

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. ...

[MFM008]

37. We sure have a lot of foreigners

Trying to elect Trump.
Wonder why.

[swhisper1]

70. we have alot of foreigners exposing the truths our own country keep from us

Thank God they take the risk

[Hekate]

83. Suuuuuure

[lapucelle]

126. The country is not keeping these truths from you.

They're broadcast and discussed every night on Fox News.
Rush and Sean give daily updates.

[swhisper1]

150. twisted talking heads are not valid sources of news, They speak corporate, not english

[lapucelle]

154. It was irony.

[pnwmom]

39. I wonder what is the status is of the rape trials that Assange is avoiding?

I know he doesn't think having sex with an unconscious woman is rape, but that should be for a jury to decide.

[randome]

41. It wasn't "legitimate" rape.

Women in Sweden have ways of shutting that down.

[AntiBank]

61. the whole case is bogus, politically driven, Marianne Ny (chief prosecutor) is a laughing stock here

The United Nations says the charges are arbitrary and politically driven:


Julian Assange arbitrarily detained by Sweden and the UK, UN expert panel finds

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=17013&LangID=E


GENEVA (5 February 2016) – WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been arbitrarily detained by Sweden and the United Kingdom since his arrest in London on 7 December 2010, as a result of the legal action against him by both Governments, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention said today.

In a public statement, the expert panel called on the Swedish and British authorities to end Mr. Assange’s deprivation of liberty, respect his physical integrity and freedom of movement, and afford him the right to compensation (Check the statement: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=17012&LangID=E)

Mr. Assange, detained first in prison then under house arrest, took refuge in Ecuador’s London embassy in 2012 after losing his appeal to the UK’s Supreme Court against extradition to Sweden, where a judicial investigation was initiated against him in connection with allegations of sexual misconduct. However, he was not formally charged.

“The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention considers that the various forms of deprivation of liberty to which Julian Assange has been subjected constitute a form of arbitrary detention,” said Seong-Phil Hong, who currently heads the expert panel.

“The Working Group maintains that the arbitrary detention of Mr. Assange should be brought to an end, that his physical integrity and freedom of movement be respected, and that he should be entitled to an enforceable right to compensation,” Mr. Hong added.


snip







ASSANGE SEX CASE SINKS IN INTERNATIONAL QUAGMIRE

http://www.apnewsarchive.com/2016/Assange_sex_case_sinks_in_international_quagmire/id-7cb4e1feadb24fc6960c66ec6d9730aa




great timeline on the whole thing

Exclusive New Docs Throw Doubt on Julian Assange Rape Charges in Stockholm

http://observer.com/2016/02/exclusive-new-docs-throw-doubt-on-julian-assange-rape-charges-in-stockholm/


snip

Sweden has both the most expansive rape laws (which extend all the way to marital bed nagging), as well as the highest number of reported rapes in the world. Fumbling, bleak and unromantic—yes, the 98-page report details the emotional arc of the women, and often reads more like a dime-store novel than a crime report: “Julian looked at Sofia with a bemused expression. She got the feeling he did not feel that she, in her bright pink cashmere sweater, belonged among all these journalists dressed in grey.”

Neither woman ever claimed, initially, that she was “raped” by Mr. Assange—rape being våldtäkt in Swedish, but both spoke of the sex being unpleasant. They both concealed their distaste for how it had transpired—that’s usually what women do. In the case of Ms. Ardin, she kept him as a houseguest for six nights after the incident, and even threw a crayfish party for him. In the case of Ms. Wilen, she and Mr. Assange, after a night of sex, joked about the broken condom, and his promise that if she got pregnant he would move to Sweden, pay off her student loans, and they “could name the baby Afghanistan.” She then went out and bought the two of them breakfast oats and orange juice. (Ian Fleming would never have allowed any of this.)

When Ms. Ardin learned Mr. Assange had also slept with Ms. Wilen, and when he failed the golden rule of elemental post-coital communications, they locked arms and went to the police—not to charge him with rape, but to see if he could be compelled to take an HIV test, on a Saturday, in Stockholm.

The report contains several testimonies—Ms. Ardin, Ms. Wilen, two Swedish male journalists, Ms. Wilen’s ex boyfriend, brother, and several friends and colleagues of the two women. Finally, Mr. Assange himself. It closes with grainy photographs of a broken condom, as well as a condom tip—and the forensic analysis of experts from “Staten’s Kriminaltekniska Laboratorium” (The State’s Criminal Technological Laboratory)—offering forensic results about the exact conditions along the broken edge of the condom. (Ruled not to have been broken by an “instrument,” but to have failed by natural means.)

After the incidents for which he is wanted for questioning took place, in mid-August 2010, Mr. Assange remained in Sweden for five weeks, until September 27, during which time Swedish prosecutors once dropped the case altogether, only to re-open it days later. Prosecutor Marianne Ny was quoted in the Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter as having said: “Even if I’m wrong, I won’t give up.”


snip


-----------


Prosecutor Marianne Ny is just embarrassing the Swedish legal system

http://theindicter.com/prosecutor-marianne-ny-is-just-embarrassing-the-swedish-legal-system/


snip

Based on what was said to police, the on-call prosecutor, Marie Kjellstrand, decided to issue an arrest warrant on charges of rape and molestation, and the next day the story hit the Swedish paper Expressen and newspapers all over the world. Kjellstrand’s decision was overruled the following day by a higher-level prosecutor, Eva Finne, who withdrew the arrest warrant and said she did not see any evidence for rape allegations. Then, on Sept. 1, a third prosecutor, Ny, re-opened the rape investigation, implying that she had new information in the case.

The best information about what was going on comes from Melbourne barrister James D. Catlin, who acted for Julian Assange in London in October. Of course this is one-sided. However there appears to be nothing to contradict this in the media storm raging in Sweden with statements from the prosecutors or the woman or their lawyer. The women here are near to and over 30 and have international experience, some of it working in Swedish government embassies. There is no suggestion of drugs nor identity concealment. Far from it. Both women boasted of their celebrity connection to Assange after the events that they would now see him destroyed for.

That further evidence hasn’t been confected to make the charges less absurd does Sweden no credit because it has no choice in the matter.

The phenomena of social networking through the internet and mobile phones constrains Swedish authorities from augmenting the evidence against Assange because it would look even less credible in the face of tweets by Anna Ardin and SMS texts by Sofia Wilén boasting of their respective conquests after the “crimes”.

In the case of Ardin it is clear that she has thrown a party in Assange’s honour at her flat after the “crime” and tweeted to her followers that she is with the “the world’s coolest smartest people, it’s amazing!”. Go on the internet and see for yourself. That Ardin has sought unsuccessfully to delete these exculpatory tweets from the public record should be a matter of grave concern. That she has published on the internet a guide on how to get revenge on cheating boyfriends ever graver. The exact content of Wilén’s mobile phone texts is not yet known but their bragging and exculpatory character has been confirmed by Swedish prosecutors. Niether Wilén’s nor Ardin’s texts complain of rape.

But then neither Arden nor Wilén complained to the police but rather “sought advice”, a technique in Sweden enabling citizens to avoid just punishment for making false complaints. They sought advice together, having collaborated and irrevocably tainted each other’s evidence beforehand. Their SMS texts to each other show a plan to contact the Swedish newspaper Expressen beforehand in order to maximise the damage to Assange. They belong to the same political group and attended a public lecture given by Assange and organised by them. You can see Wilén on the YouTube video of the event even now.

snip





'Try Me for Rape Too, Marianne Ny!'


Olle Andersson is one of the most famous news presenters ever in Sweden, sorta like a Walter Cronkite type

http://rixstep.com/2/1/20110109,01.shtml


brutal satire

--------------------------




Marianne Ny is ultra radical, she tried to get laws passed here in Sweden where all men accused of any sexual crime, even if there was no evidence, would be automatically locked up for a period of time, even if evidence showed zero proof or indeed, that it was a false charge, and even if they were acquitted they should still do jail time.

http://www.domstol.se/Publikationer/Rapporter/Kvinnofridslagen.pdf in Swedish

https://justice4assange.com/Gender-politics.html

Marianne Ny

Sundberg-Weitman’s critical comments of Marianne Ny were widely publicised: Ny is ’biased against men’ and ’a well-known radical feminist’.
"Like Mr Borgström, Ms Ny is a well known feminist. For example, she is known to have said that when a woman says she has been assaulted by a man, the man ought to be detained because it is not until he is in prison that the woman may have the peace to consider whether or not she has been mistreated. Ms Ny has stated that she believes that imprisoning the man has a positive effect, "even in cases where the perpetrator is prosecuted but not convicted". It is also informative, in regards to the presumption of innocence, that she uses the term ’perpetrator’ rather than ’defendant’ or ’suspect’ in discussing criminal investigation in rape cases."
Sundberg-Weitman is referring to a report for the act to protect women (Kvinnofridslagen) for the Court Administration in 2001.

Marianne Ny argued that:
"It is only after the man is behind bars, and when the woman has the time and peace to get a little perspective, that she has a chance to realise how she has been treated." - This arguably constitutes arbitrary detention. It is also not a legitimate reason for imprisonment: legitimate grounds in Sweden are risk of absconding, risk of collusion, risk of continued criminality.

Brita Sundberg-Weitman:
"Marianne Ny, unlike other prosecutors, has made various statements [...] in which she regards the prosecution of men, even without sufficient evidence, as in the public interest ’pour encourager les autres’ [to deter others] [emphasis added]. She is a high profile prosecutor who is also a crusader on gender issues and the international attention that this case has received may have made her intransigent and, in my view, overly harsh and disproportionate in attacking Mr Assange by way of this EAW rather than by using the Mutual Legal Assistance provisions to obtain his evidence and, indeed, accepting his proffer of evidence by way of video link or Scotland Yard interview suite or attendance at the Swedish embassy."


snip


Revealed: Assange ‘rape’ accuser linked to notorious CIA operative

http://www.rawstory.com/2010/12/assange-rape-accuser-cia-ties/


Ardin is “a gender equity officer at Uppsula University – who chose to associate with a US funded group openly supported by a convicted terrorist and mass murderer,” FireDogLake’s Kirk James Murphy observed. In August, Assange told Al-Jazeera that the accusations were “clearly a smear campaign.” “We have been warned that, for example, the Pentagon is planning on using dirty tricks to destroy our work,” Assange told the Swedish daily newspaper Aftonbladet.

The WikiLeaks founder said he was told to be careful of “sex traps.” Had Assange fallen for one of those traps? “Maybe. Maybe not,” he said.

Catlin observed that both Ardin and Sofia Wilén, the second accuser, sent SMS messages and tweets boasting of their conquests following the alleged “rapes.” “In the case of Ardin it is clear that she has thrown a party in Assange’s honour at her flat after the ‘crime’ and tweeted to her followers that she is with the ‘the world’s coolest smartest people, it’s amazing!'” he wrote.

“The exact content of Wilén’s mobile phone texts is not yet known but their bragging and exculpatory character has been confirmed by Swedish prosecutors. Niether Wilén’s nor Ardin’s texts complain of rape,” Catlin said. Ardin has also published a seven step guide on how to get revenge on cheating boyfriends.



snip

http://www.anorak.co.uk/256861/news/julian-assange-loses-his-cool-to-rape-victim-anna-ardin-wilikleaks-is-scooped.html/

What do we know about Anna Ardin? On her old blog page – now deleted, Ardin writes a mini bio:

My feminist reflections and comments on animal rights, Swedish politics and Cuba from a political scientist, Christian left and long distance runner will from now on be published at http://annaardin.wordpress.com“

Gawker tells us:

Anna Ardin, the political secretary and press officer of the Swedish “Brotherhood Movement,” a group of Christians from the Social Democratic Party controversial for inviting anti-Semitic speakers to the country

They had also invited Assange to speak.

Nicholas John Mead looks at the organs behind the news:

Assange has been in Sweden to arrange this deal and also agreed to write a column for centre-left Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet (the main rival to Expressen who “broke” this “story”), the first of which was due to be released today. Incidentally, Aftonbladet have decided to postpone publication in the light of the rape allegations.



from the Gawker article


Meet Anna Ardin, the political secretary and press officer of the Swedish "Brotherhood Movement," a group of Christians from the Social Democratic Party controversial for inviting anti-Semitic speakers to the country. Another of their invited speakers: Assange, who lectured on the group's behalf in Stockholm this month right before he was hit with sex charges from two different women, charges ultimately dismissed by Swedish police and derided by Assange as "dirty tricks." Ardin appears to have helped coordinate Assange's travel around the country; in addition to arranging the Stockholm event, she reportedly tried to arrange places for Assange to stay through her Twitter account (she has apparently since deleted the tweets and has locked her WordPress blog).

[pnwmom]

63. He is resisting going through a trial in Sweden. I tried reading your links

but had to stop when I got to this gem:

They both concealed their distaste for how it had transpired—that’s usually what women do.

[AntiBank]

65. there is no trial, he has not even been charged

He doesn't want to go back for questioning because the Swedish government has said they will probably turn him over to US authorities.

As to that sentence, Celia Farber does tend to get over the top at times in some of her articles, but it still paints a pretty accurate picture of the climate here in Sweden and also the events.

[hack89]

135. That is not true

the Swedish government has not said they will probably turn him over to US authorities.

[AntiBank]

136. they have categorically stated that that is a possibility, they refuse to

take it off the table as an option.

[hack89]

137. Let me see the government's actual words please. nt

[AntiBank]

142. here you go

http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/svensk-lag-i-vagen-for-assange-forhor/

Det är Sveriges fel om Wikileaksgrundaren Julian Assange inte kan höras av svenska åklagare innan preskriptionstiden för vissa av de sexbrott han misstänks för löper ut i augusti. Det påstod Ecuadors utrikesminister Ricardo Patiño Aroca nyligen.

Men om Ecuadors krav tillmötesgicks skulle det innebära brott mot svensk lagstiftning, enligt Cecilia Riddselius, chef för centralmyndigheten vid justitiedepartementet.


– Som villkor för att Assange ska få höras har man krävt ett särskilt avtal där Sverige erkänner asylstatus för Assange. Men regeringen kan inte göra en sådan utfästelse eftersom det är Migrationsverket som prövar om en person har rätt till asyl, säger Riddselius till TT.

I Sveriges och Ecuadors skriftväxling om villkoren för förhör uttrycker Ecuador oro över att Assange – om han så småningom skulle hamna i Sverige – riskerar att utlämnas till USA för misstänkta brott där.

– Men ett tillstånd att hålla förhör förändrar inte det faktum att Assange fortfarande befinner sig på deras ambassad och åtnjuter den politiska asyl som de gett honom, säger Riddselius.

Åklagaren kan alltså inte ta med Assange till Sverige efter förhören.

Trots det kräver Ecuador redan nu en garanti från Sveriges regering om att Assange inte kommer att utlämnas till USA längre fram.

– Svensk rätt medger inte att man på förhand ger en sådan garanti, säger Riddselius.

En eventuell utlämning till USA kan dessutom avgöras av regeringen först efter yttranden av riksåklagaren och Högsta domstolen. I det här fallet skulle det dessutom krävas ett samtycke från Storbritannien.

Svenska åklagare var i London under sommaren för att höra Assange men släpptes inte in på ambassaden. Enligt Riddselius berodde det på att Sverige inte gått med på de krav som strider mot svensk rätt.


snip



and here is an English summary


Sweden 'can't offer Assange guarantees'

http://www.thelocal.se/20120625/41636

Sweden would not be able to offer Julian Assange a diplomatic guarantee against being extradited to the United States should the WikiLeaks founder end up back in Sweden to face sex crime accusations, according to a justice ministry official.

On Monday, it emerged that Assange may be ready to return to Sweden to face questioning over claims by two women that he raped and sexually assaulted them in August 2010.

However, he would only consider giving up his lengthy battle to avoid extradition to Sweden if officials in Stockholm guaranteed that he wouldn't be turned over to the United States to face espionage and conspiracy charges over secret US documents previously published by WikiLeaks.

But an official with Sweden's Ministry of Justice said that, according to current legislation, Sweden couldn't provide Assange with the guarantees he's currently seeking.

"Any such guarantee doesn't exist," Cecilia Riddselius, a staff member with the ministry's Division for Criminal Cases and International Judicial Cooperation, told the Dagens Nyheter (DN) newspaper.

"After having worked on these issues for ten years, I can't see how it could become reality."

[hack89]

143. It doesn't say what you think it says

Last edited Wed Jun 22, 2016, 12:01 PM - Edit history (1)

according to Swedish law, it would not be legal to give Assange a guarantee of no extradition. Which makes sense - Sweden has an independent judiciary. The government cannot tell a judge how to rule on a matter of law. Same thing in America - the executive branch could not make such a guarantee either - it would violate separation of powers.

What they are telling Assange is that if the US requests extradition then a judge and only a judge say yes or no.

[AntiBank]

146. you are just flat out wrong (and you do not understand our government and judicial system here)

Here is an English article that debunks your claim entirely


The claim that Swedish courts, not government, have final say on extradition is a crucial mistake that distorts the Assange case


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/24/new-statesman-error-assange-swedish-extradition

The falsehood here is clear and straightforward. One of the "myths" Green purported to debunk was that "Sweden should guarantee that there be no extradition to USA." Assange's lawyers, along with Ecuadorean officials, have repeatedly told Sweden and Britain that Assange would immediately travel to Stockholm to face these allegations if some type of satisfactory assurance against extradition to the US could be given. This is the paramount issue because it shows that it is not Assange and Ecuadorean officials – but rather the Swedish and British governments – who are preventing the sex assault allegations from being fairly and legally resolved as they should be.

But Green claimed that "It would not be legally possible for Swedish government to give any guarantee about a future extradition, and nor would it have any binding effect on the Swedish legal system in the event of a future extradition request." He said that this is so in part because "any final word on an extradition would (quite properly) be with an independent Swedish court, and not the government giving the purported 'guarantee'." He then cited a British lawyer (notably, not a Swedish one) who made the same claim:

"It appears that if the extradition is contested as it would be in Assange's case then it is a matter for the court not the government to decide if he is extradited."

This is completely and unquestionably false. It is simply untrue that it is Swedish courts, rather than the Swedish government, who are the final decision-makers in extradition requests. It is equally untrue that the Swedish government has no final decision-making power regarding extradition requests that are legally sanctioned by the Swedish judiciary. These are not matters for reasonable debate. The law is clear. Green's claim is false.


Last night, international law professor Kevin Jon Heller at Melbourne Law School emailed me and wrote:

"It is incorrect to say that the final decision to extradite Assange from Sweden to the US would be made by the courts."

He directed me to this analysis from Mark Klamberg – a professor of international law at the University of Stockholm – who dissects Sweden's extradition law and makes Green's error as clear as it can be [my emphasis]:

"How does procedure work if somebody is to extradited from Sweden? … If the person referred to in the request has not consented to being extradited, the case shall be tried by the supreme court. Section 20(1) provides that if the supreme court has considered that there is a legal obstacle to extradition the request may not be granted.

"Even if the supreme court has found that there are no obstacles, the government can refuse extradition. This is because section 1(1) provides that if certain conditions are fulfilled, a person 'may' not 'shall' be extradited. In other words, even if the prosecutor-general and the supreme court finds that all conditions for extradition are fulfilled the government may veto such extradition. It does not work in the reverse way, the government can not grant extradition if the supreme court has found that any of the required conditions are lacking."

Let's repeat that: "Even if the supreme court has found that there are no obstacles, the government can refuse extradition." And: "Even if the prosecutor-general and the supreme court finds that all conditions for extradition are fulfilled the government may veto such extradition." In other words, under clear Swedish law, the Swedish government has exactly the final decision-making authority over extradition that Green told his readers it lacks.


Professor Klamberg is far from alone in making this clear. As I noted on Wednesday, this Swedish-Moroccon lawyer analyzed Swedish extradition law in rigorous detail to make the same point:

"Swedish extradition law clearly states that the Swedish government is the body deciding on any extradition request."

Moreover:

"No provision gives any court the right to decide on an extraditions request."



snip



also see

Extradition for Criminal Offences (this IS from our government, orginal sourced Swedish Law)

http://www.government.se/government-of-sweden/ministry-of-justice/international-judicial-co-operation/extradition-for-criminal-offences/


Procedure

Any state that desires the extradition of a person must make a request for extradition to the Central Authority, enclosing the report of the investigation on which the application request is based.

The Central Authority scrutinises the request to see if there is obvious reason why it should not be approved; if this is the case, the Government shall reject the request without delay. Otherwise the request is forwarded to the Office of the Prosecutor-General, which is required to determine whether the conditions for extradition laid down by law are met in this particular case. The actual investigation of the case follows the rules for preliminary investigations and is conducted by the regional or local public prosecution office in which district the person who is sought for extradition lives. If the person whose extradition is requested opposes extradition, it falls to the Supreme Court to examine whether extradition can be legally granted under the conditions laid down by law. The Supreme Court then delivers its opinion to the Government for use in its examination of the case. If the person involved does not oppose to extradition, the report from the investigation is instead delivered directly from the Prosecutor-General to the Government, which then makes its decision. If the request is approved, a date is set by which the person must be surrendered to the requesting state. With the assistance of Interpol, the police authority concerned determines a time and place for surrendering the person to the other state.

If the Supreme Court finds that there is any legal impediment to extradition, the Government is not allowed to approve the request. The Government can, however, refuse extradition even if the Supreme Court has not declared against extradition, as the law states that if certain conditions are fulfilled, a person "may" be extradited - not "shall" be extradited.


snip


Sweden’s argument for refusing to issue non-extradition guarantees to Mr Assange is fallacious and hides real commitment to the U.S. – Analysis

The Indicter, Vol 2, Nr 31, 20 February 2016

By Prof Marcello Ferrada de Noli PhD.

Chairman of Swedish Doctors for Human Rights and of The Indicter’s Editorial board.

http://theindicter.com/swedens-argument-for-refusing-to-issue-non-extradition-guarantees-to-mr-assange-is-fallacious-and-hides-real-commitment-to-the-u-s-analysis/


snip

It would be highly appropriate that the Swedish government declares whether they consider Assange a terrorist or not. This is essential for the debate, because top US-govt officials and politicians have already labelled Assange as ‘terrorist’. In this meaning, the extradition request from the part of the U.S. government could be by arguing Assange is indicted on terrorist activities.

Following Judge argumentation, an extradition processed in Sweden under the terrorist legislation does give the government extraordinary powers, meaning, it does not need to submit the case for consideration by the Court. In other words, this crime-categorization would even make the process quicker and less complicated in Sweden.

In the context, there is a very aggravating accusation against Julian Assange which equalizes with the American “cyber terrorist” charges. It was put forward directly by the Swedish military. Assange was accused during a main TV news program ‘Rapport’, broadcasted by the Swedish state TV, of being “blackmailing Sweden” See details on this preposterous accusation on straightforward criminal behaviour, such as blackmailing the Nation of Sweden, in my post “Sweden’s FOI publicly slandering Assange & WikiLeaks while in secret help building missile factory for Saudi Arabia dictatorship“. And who is the accusation-messenger Mr Mike Winnerstig? A reserve-army officer and member of the Swedish Military Academy, was at the time Deputy Director of the Military Research Institute FOA (under the Ministry of Defence). He has participated as lecturer in events sponsored by NATO and the US Embassy in Sweden, and a strong lobbyist for Sweden’s entrance to NATO.


Why the ‘impossibility of non-extradition guarantees’ is a fake?

Simply, because the government of Sweden has the legal possibility of vetoing any court decision, any police authority decision, any immigration authority decision on issues of deportation, extradition or rendition. Period.

I have already clarified in page 18 of my book (2016) “Sweden VS Assange. HR issues & Political Backgrund”: [14]

“At the contrary of what is stated by Swedish sources, it is the Swedish government –and not the judicial system – which ultimately can decide the issue of extradition to a third country. The government is fully entitled to issue guarantees of a non-extradition.”

[hack89]

147. Sweden's Ministry of Justice appears to disagree with you

at least according to the link you provided previously. You then posted an opinion piece that disagrees with your first link. Perhaps it is not as clear cut as you want to think it is.

[AntiBank]

148. Sweden's Ministry of Justice appears to disagree with you <<<<< show me

Plus I posted OUR LAW on the subject.

I love how some arrogant Americans with a certain agenda come barging in and try to tell other countries and people who actually live in them (I have lived in Stockholm for almost a decade) what to do or that we don't know our own laws or that we we are just like the US or that we need to do this or that to fit your own agendas and axes to grind.

[AntiBank]

149. the Prime Minster can order Morgan Johansson, the Justitieminister (Head of the Ministry of Justice)

to issue the guarantee of non-extradition. Also the Riksdag as a whole can pass the order through passage of an law.

[msanthrope]

85. Using a virulent Holocaust denier as an Assange defender is classy. Really classy. nt

[AntiBank]

89. what are you talking about? what Holocaust denier?

[msanthrope]

91. What Holocaust denier? How about the Wikileaks employee and noted Holocaust denier

Israel Shamir, who is the sole source of the lies regarding the two accusers you posted.

Welcome to DU. Your sources were debunked, years ago.....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026388527

[AntiBank]

94. I didn't post shit about or by Israel Shamir, take your lunacy and conspiracy theories elsewhere

[msanthrope]

96. You most certainly did....the honeypot/CIA defense was originated, without a shred of

evidence, by him. Read the linked OP..... the next time you should know your sources better.

[AntiBank]

99. the possible honeypot nature is far from the central point to all of this, Snowden released docs

revealed in 2013 that the U.S. asked the prosecution of Assange in August 2010 to the handful of governments participating under US command in the military occupation of Afghanistan. Only Sweden complied, at a time with a foreign policy under the subservient rule of Carl Bildt, i, who was exposed by WikiLeaks (massive scandal here I might add) of being a secret information officer for the US.


https://professorsblogg.com/2015/03/13/the-scandalous-political-case-of-the-swedish-prosecutor-authority-vs-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange/



[1] The US government approached Sweden’s authorities on the situation around Julian Assange and the WikiLeaks exposures of 2010, in August that year. The Swedish press reported on the meetings in Stockholm. Secondly, as reported in both the Phillip Shenon and NSA documents (the report by Greenwald & Gallagher in Intercept), the US contacted all countries with forces in Afghanistan with the request to initiate prosecution against the WikiLeaks founder. As being Sweden a principal country participating with military troops in Afghanistan, it is beyond discussion as to whether Sweden was also among the nations contacted by the US for that purpose. My conclusion being that it is highly likely that the reopening of the “case Assange” by Swedish authorities on the 20 of August 2010 was part of the US request of the 10 of August to prosecute Julian Assange by any means. But it is not only a design to simply “prosecute Assange”. The meaning of the strategic design in the context of the referred US request was not Assange as person, but the concept was (is) to immobilize WikiLeaks. For this a long protracted process had to be brought in place.

Follows a sequence around the European Arrest Warrant issues by the Swedish prosecutor against Julian Assange,[21] and where the conclusion emerging is that the real target of the EAW was not the detention of Assange, but the creation of an extradition process:

Assange arrived to the airport around noon, and even chosen to change to a later SAS flight of his preferences. He finally left Arlanda Airport for Berlin Tegel at 17.15. Latest around 16.55 he would have gone through airport security where, with the usual heavy police presence, staff at the gate leading to the departure hall checked his passport (if not already checked at the desk), boarding card, etc. Besides, the police have all the passengers’ lists in advance.
According to the prosecutor office in Gothenburg, Assange was “detained in absentia” already at 14.15 on 27 September 2010. [24] Normally, such order goes to all police units in the country. Why wasn’t he detained at the airport? It could not be that they missed his identity. Quite the opposite: because they knew his identity at the airport desk or at the control gate, the police (or government officials, or whoever agency was operating) managed to take the laptops from Assange’s checked-in suitcase. [22] Besides, he stayed around five hours at the airport’s premises. They just couldn’t have missed him.
Assange was never informed about the “detention in absentia”. Further, Assange’s laywer Björn Hurtig had obtained an agreement from the prosecutor Marianne Ny that Julian Assange “was free to leave Sweden”. [23]

In fact, Assange’s lawyer received the communication on the “detention warrant” issued my Marianne Ny (the warrant that Elisabeth Massi Fritz is writing about in connection to Assange’s departure for Berlin on the 27 of September), as late as the 30 September 2010. This means three days after that it was issued by the same Marianne Ny.
In support of this claim I refer here to the Supreme Court document “Agreed Statement of Facts And Issues. Between: Julian Paul Assange (Applicant) V. Swedish Prosecution Authority (Respondent)”, hearings 1-2 Feb 2012,. In Item 17, page 5, it reads: “On 30th September 2010, the Appellant’s counsel [Björn Hurtig] was advised of the existence of the arrest warrant.”

The EAW immobilized Assange and, to a greater extent, WikiLeaks’ activities. In previous analyses, I have demonstrated that it is beyond doubt that this case is political motivated. There isn’t a genuine legal case behind the charade of the Swedish Prosecutor Authority and the plaintiff’s prejudiced lawyers. This is not the first time that this sort of behaviour has been seen in Sweden.




snip




Julian Assange on Being Placed on NSA "Manhunting" List & Secret Targeting of WikiLeaks Supporters

http://www.democracynow.org/2014/2/18/julian_assange_on_being_placed_on


Top-secret documents leaked by Edward Snowden have revealed new details about how the United States and Britain targeted the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks after it published leaked documents about the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan. According to a new article by The Intercept, Britain’s top spy agency, the Government Communications Headquarters, or GCHQ, secretly monitored visitors to a WikiLeaks website by collecting their IP addresses in real time, as well as the search terms used to reach the site. One document from 2010 shows that the National Security Agency added WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange to a "manhunting" target list, together with suspected members of al-Qaeda. We speak to Assange live from the Ecuadorean embassy in London, where he has sought political asylum since 2012. Also joining us is his lawyer Michael Ratner, president emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights.

TRANSCRIPT
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Top-secret documents leaked by Edward Snowden have revealed new details about how the United States and Britain targeted the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks after it published leaked documents about the Afghan War. According to a new article co-written by Glenn Greenwald published this morning by The Intercept, Britain’s top spy agency, the Government Communications Headquarters, or GCHQ, secretly monitored visitors to a WikiLeaks site by collecting their IP addresses in real time as well as the search terms used to reach the site. One document from 2010 shows that the National Security Agency added WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange to a, quote, "manhunting" target list, together with suspected members of al-Qaeda.

AMY GOODMAN: Another document reveals the NSA considered designating WikiLeaks as a "malicious foreign actor." According to The Intercept, "Such a designation would have allowed the group to be targeted with extensive electronic surveillance—without the need to exclude U.S. persons from the surveillance searches." In addition, the leaked documents reveal the United States urged its foreign allies to file criminal charges against Assange over the group’s publication of the Afghanistan War Logs.

Joining us now from London is Wikileaks founder and editor Julian Assange, talking to us by the phone from the Ecuadorean embassy where he has political asylum since August 2012. Here in New York, we’re joined by Michael Ratner, the attorney for Julian Assange, president emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights.

When you read this, Julian — welcome back to Democracy Now! — what were your thoughts on being put on this "manhunting"—their words—"manhunting" list together with al-Qaeda?


snip

[Major Hogwash]

119. Be careful of that one.

She has several tin foil hats laying around, and she'll put one on, by gawd!!

[AntiBank]

109. Ironic you toss this out, as one of Assange's accusers worked for a Swedish group who brought in

Last edited Mon Jun 20, 2016, 06:02 PM - Edit history (1)

anti-semitic speakers.


http://gawker.com/5619931/meet-wikileaks-founders-alleged-sex-victim

Meet Anna Ardin, the political secretary and press officer of the Swedish "Brotherhood Movement," a group of Christians from the Social Democratic Party controversial for inviting anti-Semitic speakers to the country. Another of their invited speakers: Assange, who lectured on the group's behalf in Stockholm this month right before he was hit with sex charges from two different women, charges ultimately dismissed by Swedish police and derided by Assange as "dirty tricks." Ardin appears to have helped coordinate Assange's travel around the country; in addition to arranging the Stockholm event, she reportedly tried to arrange places for Assange to stay through her Twitter account (she has apparently since deleted the tweets and has locked her WordPress blog).

snip

--------------------------------------------


this is the group Ardin was the political secretary for

commonly called Broderskapsrörelsen (Brotherhood Movement)

Socialdemokrater för tro och solidaritet

http://www.socialdemokraterna.se/trosolidaritet

Azzam Tamimi was brought in by them, he is one of the more virulent supporters in the UK of Hamas and has made many anti-semitic statements over the years.

They also brought in Gilad Atzmon, an Israeli jew who is hated for his anti-Zionism.


"Social democrats invite famous anti-Semites" I used Google translate as you probably tala inte eller läsa inte svenska (don't speak or read Swedish)

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.expressen.se%2Fdebatt%2Fsocialdemokrater-bjuder-in-kanda-antisemiter%2F&edit-text=

[msanthrope]

115. So you finally used google? nt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

116. To very good effect, I'd say. You got it handed to you.

[msanthrope]

120. Actually, no.... the fact that the poster chooses to go after the victim is instructive.

I mean, no one is suggesting that her political leanings somehow justify victimization correct?

[randome]

125. Yes. That is what is being suggested.

[AntiBank]

131. I am going after the entirety of all the events

the "blame the victim" meme is not valid

[msanthrope]

139. No....you aren't. The fact that you repeated the narrative of a Wikileaks employee regarding the

sham honeypot defense shows that you have engaged in victim-shaming.

[AntiBank]

140. no

you are a one trick pony

you only keep repeating the same blather

[msanthrope]

141. It is you who used the story of a virulent Holocaust denier. It is you who suggested the

political leanings of sex crimes victims, real or imagined, had any bearing on whether or not their claims should be investigated.

Welcome to DU.

[AntiBank]

145. and its you who cherry pick any angle, first off by seizing

on one of the most minor parts to the entire clusterfuck of a case, (and still has not been definitively debunked btw, but that is small beer to overall case atm) and second by trying to toss out some inane anti semitic card ( as if the person you ramble on about is the sui geneis and sole source for any of it) when Anna Ardin (the woman in question) herself was one of the heads of a political organisation here in Sweden who regularly sponsored anti semitic speakers.

[Lord Magus]

47. Racketeer says fugitive rapist will be Hillary's worst nightmare?

Well damn, that's certainly newsworthy!

[AntiBank]

73. Assange is not a rapist, you have very little understanding obviously of the case here in Sweden

He has not even been charged, 5 of the 6 warrants for questioning have already run out, the case had already been dropped for utter lack of evidence in 2010 until Marianne Ny re-opened it after pressure from certain sectors and the US government, the laws here are extremely arbitrary and overly broad, plus the chief prosecutor Ny is a radical hack who is widely ridiculed here. The entire thing is politically motivated to try and get him into the US government's hands. I have covered this upthread already.

The only reason you are smearing him with false charges is that he is anti-Clinton, anti establishment.

[YoungDemCA]

103. For someone who lives in Sweden you don't seem to know how criminal investigations there work

The formal filing of charges are one of the last parts of a criminal investigation in Sweden. This case never made it that far. You can thank Assange for that.

I really don't get why people defend Assange. It's not like he is the only person in the world who can do (or is doing) the things he does. The fate of the world is not dependent on the fate of one man - certainly not a man who refuses to face serious allegations of rape and sexual assault.

[AntiBank]

105. because he is a target of an bogus, arbitrary investigation (the United Nations says so)

designed to render him into the USA's hands. The US targets him (see my other posts on this OP thread) becuase he helps to expose their empiric wars and and war crimes.

simple as that


Julian Assange arbitrarily detained by Sweden and the UK, UN expert panel finds - See more at: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=17013&LangID=E#sthash.9aTsD30B.dpuf

[YoungDemCA]

107. I'm sure Assange, like most rapists, does feel that the investigation is bogus

Racists tend to be entitled pricks like that.

As for that woefully uninformed panel of "experts"...sorry, not buying it. Try again.

[AntiBank]

110. lol, still on with the smears, well goodbye to you, you dont even have the intelligence to put in

"accused"

Go back to egging on the war state, I am sure you will be well pleased with POTUS Clinton's hawkishness.

Down the dove!!

[lapucelle]

127. That's not what the report says.

The UN report says the following:

Having concluded that there was a continuous deprivation of liberty, the Working Group also found that the detention was arbitrary because he was held in isolation during the first stage of detention and because of the lack of diligence by the Swedish Prosecutor in its investigations, which resulted in the lengthy detention of Mr. Assange.

The UN didn't say the investigation was bogus; it said the investigation was not moving quickly enough.

[AntiBank]

132. No, it also says the case is arbitrary

[lapucelle]

123. Here is the US we call that waiting out the statute of limitations.

Nobody is smearing Assange. People are simply assailing him with the actual facts of his life and situation. He's not reliable, not credible, and is trying to leverage "secret emails that only he has" (i.e. manufactured crap) into a deal to avoid standing trial for a sexual assault.

As for his vaunted searchable archive of Clinton emails, that's been available on the State Department website since the first emails were released in the FOICA case.

[AntiBank]

133. you are conflating issues

you and others keep dragging Clinton into this now

[MyNameGoesHere]

51. Why is going to try and penetrate her while she's sleeping? I'm

Rumor has it he likes that sort of thing.

[YoungDemCA]

55. It's telling that Assange jumped bail.

nt

[brooklynite]

71. The phrase you're looking for is: "a unique perspective on criminal justice".

[AntiBank]

75. he DID NOT jump bail, the case had been dropped when he left Sweden

It was reopened latter, and he has not even been charged officially, the warrants (5 of the 6 have dropped off) are for questioning only, and the main reason he doesn't want to come back here to Sweden is that our government has said they will probably turn him over to the USA.

Get your facts straight before you pip up with your nonsense.

[msanthrope]

86. Yes.....he did jump bail. That's why bail was forfeited by those who put it up in the UK. nt

[AntiBank]

90. I was referring to Swedish case, not the UK bail

[msanthrope]

92. Bail was never set in Sweden. But, he gets to go to jail in the UK for jumping bail, a crime

in and of itself.

[Lord Magus]

95. The Swedish government has said nothing of the sort.

There is in fact no realistic expectation that Sweden would extradite Assange. He's not even currently charged with anything in the US, and long-standing Swedish policy is to refuse extradition on espionage charges. Thus, it would seem the only charge he's worried about is the rape charge.

[AntiBank]

98. they refuse to offer a non extradition guarantee, and there possibly is a sealed indictment

against Assange here in the US.

I live in Stockholm, I know this case like the back of my hand.


Sweden’s argument for refusing to issue non-extradition guarantees to Mr Assange is fallacious and hides real commitment to the U.S.

The Indicter, Vol 2, Nr 31, 20 February 2016

By Prof Marcello Ferrada de Noli PhD.

Chairman of Swedish Doctors for Human Rights and of The Indicter’s Editorial board.

http://theindicter.com/swedens-argument-for-refusing-to-issue-non-extradition-guarantees-to-mr-assange-is-fallacious-and-hides-real-commitment-to-the-u-s-analysis/

In fact, the former chairman of the United Nations’ Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD), the Norwegian jurist Mads Andenas – who worked with the case Assange since the beginning – has recently declared that “the panel came under considerable political pressure from the US and UK when compiling their report.“

Why would the US government put pressure against the release of Mr Assange, if not for the reason they want the Swedish arrest warrant against Julian Assange shall be fulfilled, ergo, that Mr Assange should end under custody of Sweden’s authorities? What other reason the US is having for this, if not for it would made possible the implementation of the indictment against Julian Assange and WikiLeaks? [1] [2]

For the above, the obvious is that Sweden would have to extradite the WikiLeaks founder. However, the Swedish government refuses to give guarantees. For instance, Fmr Foreign Minister Carl Bildt declared to Human-Rights lawyer Jennifer Robinson that Sweden “couldn’t give that guarantee; that it’s a judicial process.” [3]

And against the backdrop that Mr Assange has been called “terrorist” by the Vice President of the US [See down below], [4] it is necessary to clarify once for all what is the record of Sweden with regards to the US on matters of legal and of extra-court extraditions, including renditions. As seen below, the judge who chaired the committee on Sweden’s extradition-law revealed recently that the “(Swedish) anti-terrorism law gives the government wide discretion”. [5]

Contrary to speculations by Swedish scholars [See my rebuttal to a comment sent by Assoc. Professor Mark Klamberg to The Professor’ Blog] [6] or disinformation spread by a monopoly Swedish press, [7] a fact-based analysis demonstrates that the extradition of Mr Assange by Sweden to the US is not only juridical feasible, but most certain to happen, provided he will be taken to custody in Swedish territory. Corollary to the juridical (and extra-juridical) feasibility of a prospective extradition of Mr Julian Assange to the U.S. feasible, the analysis shows that Sweden’s stance on the ‘legal impossibility of giving non-extradition guarantees’ is fallacious.

1. Introduction
Montesquieu’s principle on democratic separation of powers has been made in Sweden a sad charade around the Assange case. And at this stage, no one, nowhere, would insist that this is not a true political case.

Besides the political motivations and geopolitical interests behind the prosecution of Assange, the request to Sweden from the U.S. government, etc., analyzed in my article “Sweden doesn’t follow U.N., but U.S. – Prosecution of Assange requested by the US, Snowden document reveals“, we witness the spectacle of statements on the ‘juridical status’ of the case consistently made by the government representatives – not by the ‘independent’ judiciary or prosecutor carrying our the ‘legal case’.


snip

[lapucelle]

128. It was dropped and then reopened.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-11949341
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-11151277

[AntiBank]

130. I know this, thats was mentioned in my first posts

[senz]

72. May the truth come out. May corruption have nowhere to hide.

"But let justice roll down as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream."

Bring it on, Assange. Let it roll.

[WhiteTara]

74. He better hurry. The year

is half over!

[stevenleser]

93. Tick tock!

Three hours, 45 minutes and counting!

[YoungDemCA]

102. The US cannot and has not charged Assange with anything.

He's in no danger of being extradited to the U.S. His behavior thus far has shown that he is really afraid of returning to Sweden however. I can only imagine why!

[MrWendel]

104. Chances are...

your never gonna catch him doing any hard hitting investigative journalism on that Stanford rape case.

[The_Casual_Observer]

151. Why doesn't this creep man up and surrender

Already? How long can he hide out in that place?

[Chan790]

153. Kim Dotcom: Who gives a shit what that thieving, objectivist fuck thinks? n/t