to think Julian Assange is a complete tool?

[WestieMamma]

His latest offering is bitching online about how he is being abused by being detained for 3 years without being charged.

"I have not been charged. It's an extraordinary situation that someone could be detained for three years without charge. That's part of the abuses in this case,"

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/10229910/Julian-Assange-claims-Australian-men-dont-kiss-and-tell.html

print - from what I have seen and read (and I admittedly, somewhat tenuously, know someone that has met him a few times), I doubt it. But no doubt that will get trotted out as a potential defence if and when the time comes.

YANBU

The man is a waste of air.

He's not be detained, he's been on the run. And surely Sweden is a safer place to be than the UK if you are avoiding US extradition?

Plus being an alleged rapist who is avoiding trial doesn't exactly look good.

So, no one on MN is even the slightest bit suspicious of the circumstances leading up to the rape allegations, their timings, and the politics within the Swedish government over them, nor can possibly imagine a world where a person who dumps US secrets into the open is under threat?

Janey - that is not the question posed by the OP. As I posted earlier, even if there is something dodgy going on, he has not been detained, he is voluntarily hiding out. Therefore the only possible answer to the OP is YANBU.

And I repeat, someone who genuinely felt they had done the right thing, ought to have the courage of their convictions and stand up and be counted, rather than hide.

Lazyjaney: can you give me a link to a reputable news source which claims that he will get extradited to the US.

Because I see a man who is using his delicate diplomatic position as a shield for other criminal behaviour. And its very easy for the US to extradite someone from the UK, so don't see why Sweden needs get involved at all in that.

I have no idea whether he committed sex offences or not. He is innocent until proven guilty.

But yes, a total tool.

He has not been detained, he is hiding in an embassy.

You do not deal with criminal allegations (whether you are innocent or guilty) by making out that responding would be like a kiss and tell. That is really, really distasteful.

Wikileaks may have some admiral principles, but they have also done some very stupid and dangerous things WRT their lack of redaction, etc. They also basically dumped Manning like a hot turd.

Finally, in a written statement, you'd think he'd manage better grammar.

Lazeyjayney around the world there are people being detained for many many years without charge or without trial, indeed in many countries the average length of pre-trial detention exceeds the length of post-trial detention and it happens because those countries are so poor their criminal justice systems simply cannot meet the costs of delivering a fair trial.

Want to get angry about human rights abuse get angry about that. Look up Penal Reform International or Amnesty and do something about it today.

Julian Assange had the opportunity to answer questions whilst not in custody in Sweden, chose not to do so, fled to Britain, had a bail hearing here and was granted it. Then made three attempts at judicial review (the judgments can all be read for free at BAILII if you want to see just how carefully the arguments he advanced regarding why the European Arrest Warrant should not be honoured in his specific case were scrutinised) before breaking his bail conditions leaving his friends to forfeit the bail money they had agreed to pay for him.

And then he calls himself the victim of a human rights abuse and claims the only reason he didn't answer questions in the first place was that he was being a gentleman.

It doesn't matter if he thinks he is under threat. The fact that he is currently living in the Ecuadorian embassy is not a human rights abuse because he is there voluntarily.

If he left the embassy and was extradited to Sweden that would not be a human rights abuse because he has had all the due process in England one person can reasonably have.

If Sweden detained him without trial or held an unfair trial or tortured him or killed him those would be human rights abuses.

If Sweden handed him over to the US authorities without a chance for him to challenge the extradition decision that would be a human rights abuse.

But until one of those things happens he cannot sit around carping about human rights abuses because all that has happened to him is he has been asked to answer some questions and consistently refused.

Funny how we never heard anything about the sexual assault allegations until after he published American confidential military and political documents.

That's not correct. The rape allegations were in the public forum before the documents were issued.

I thought you could be tried and convicted in your absence?

Not in Sweden. The Swedish system is an inquisitorial system as opposed the the UK adversarial system. The accused is obliged to take part in the 'investigation'.

quesadilla - I think that if the US Government wanted to set him up and/or teach him a lesson they'd have made a much better and more tightly controlled job of it than this! Anyway OP YANBU - he is a mahoosive tool who also looks creepy. I do wonder how this will end though.

There has been some speculation on the web that he may have Aspergers. What do you think?

I think it's irrelevant and part of the smokescreen.

So, no one on MN is even the slightest bit suspicious of the circumstances leading up to the rape allegations, their timings, and the politics within the Swedish government over them, nor can possibly imagine a world where a person who dumps US secrets into the open is under threat?

You do realise don't you that even Assange has never once claimed 'fear of extradition to the US' in anything official. If he genuinely thought this and had reason to, why not use it as part of his argument against extradition to Sweden? Why not say it when he had the chance to in court? Because it has no basis in reality and he knows it.

Besides which, it's easier to be deported to the US from the UK than Sweden. He wasn't bothered about that, and didn't feel the need to hide in the embassy until it looked certain he would have to face up to the rape allegations.

Oh well, I get a little pleasure out of knowing that if he had been man enough to face the accusations, had been found guilty and received the toughest sentence available, he'd be a free man by now. His self imposed imprisonment is far harsher.

at the expense of the taxpayer no doubt.

yes if hes innocent hed give himself up and prove it. hed have no reason to hide.

i think hes guilty too of sexual assault. yet people supporting him (incl some slebs)???????????????????

but if he was British hed hadve been arrested and jailed and trialled by now.

human rights thing has gotten beyond a joke in this country.

What are you on about GameSet? It's nothing to do with human rights that he hasn't been sent to Sweden. It is because he is in the Embassy of Educador, and therefore technically on their soil. He's the one bleating about human rights.

Yes, it is costing us money though to have police standing outside waiting to arrest him if he tries to make a run for it. I assume they are still there (anyone know?).

Yes they are still there Amanda.

He's just pissed off that he got Ecuador and Snowden got Russia.

No Westie, not irrelevant if he genuinely does have Aspergers.

I pity anyone gullible enough to think that should Assange emerge from the Ecuadorian embassy there will be any attempt to levy genuine justice for the highly dubious charges levied against him. He would be banged up in a US supermax prison before his feet touched the ground.

That said he does come across as a bit of a cock.

I think he's rather brave. It is bravery tbh what he has done. He probably needs to face the consequences of the trumped up charges against him.

Berlusconi walks free. Assange is in hiding. How is this fair?

He would be banged up in a US supermax prison before his feet touched the ground
Nonsense. He was walking around free in London for months before going into hiding. He didn't worry about being sent to the US then. And Sweden is far less beholden to the US than the UK. They don't have the same grovelling one-sided extradition treaty that we have with the US.

He's not even denying doing the act, (she was asleep/half asleep), he's arguing that what he did wasn't illegal. So it's not even trumped up. He really is a sleaze.

On the contrary, Sweden have form for sending wanted people off to the US without due process. Not to mention it has a population under 10 million so is even easier for the US to bully than we are.

Julian Assange applied for Swedish residency not long before the allegations were made. He clearly didn't consider Sweden a dangerous place for him to be then.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11570283

And yes, to answer the OP, I think he's a tool.

Oh well, I get a little pleasure out of knowing that if he had been man enough to face the accusations, had been found guilty and received the toughest sentence available, he'd be a free man by now. His self imposed imprisonment is far harsher

And it never occurred to you his legal team probably knew that but considered it still was too risky?