Hard News: Wikileaks: The Cable Guys
790 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 19 20 21 22 23 … 32 Newer→ Last
-
Tim Hannah, in reply to
Or it was a seat of the pants operation, full of amateurs doing their best,
Badly planned, in other words.
*Edit: Indeed even a spook n00b knows that it wouldn’t be the FBI doing it…doh.
I didn't pick up on that. So you're at least one step up the career ladder.
-
Tim Hannah, in reply to
That's massively depressing, not wildly surprising and really puts the final nail into the arguments about diplomats needing secrecy to promote human rights dealt to by Giovanni's go to guy on this subject (see Giovani's post)
-
I didn't pick up on that. So you're at least one step up the career ladder.
Or you're really, really good, whereas I'm just good.
-
I'd been wondering how much of the talk about the US waltzing in and extraditing Assange from Sweden was mere speculation.
Turns out, pretty much all of it. Both the extradition agreement between Sweden and the US and extradition law in general excludes "political crimes" and especially "primary" political crimes such as the publication of classified information.
It's really well covered in an interview Paul Deady did on The Wire today with an American extradition lawyer:
http://95bfm.com/default,198063.sm
The guy said extradition lawyers would be queueing up to argue Assange's case if it came to that.
-
Perhaps the Swedish authorities, when the cables were leaked, went “We need to act with regard to this investigation sooner rather than later because we now have good reason to think Assange will go to ground.”
It's not outrageous to suppose that the handling of the case was influenced by who Assange was and how he rolls.
The Guardian has a wild letter today from a spokeswoman from Women Against Rape who asserts, absent much understanding of the case, let alone evidence, that the whole thing is a political setup that insults all real rape victims.
She declares that it's unheard of for a rape accused not to get bail. If she'd bothered to read anything, she'd have known why the judge did that. It's not crazy for a man who turned up in the UK with no record of him having entered the country to be regarded as a flight risk. The Guardian's own news story quoted a couple of suitably unsurprised experts.
Hopefully, the judge will reconsider that decision in a week, but all this pointing to every single thing as evidence of conspiracy is giving me a headache.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Hopefully, the judge will reconsider that decision in a week, but all this pointing to every single thing as evidence of conspiracy is giving me a headache.
Your headache was planted years ago, and is just a foretaste of what will be unleashed if the secret keys are released.
-
Hopefully, the judge will reconsider that decision in a week, but all this pointing to every single thing as evidence of conspiracy is giving me a headache.
I don't know how many times in the past 2 days I have said "There's a sexual assault charge, and there's Wikileaks. These two things are not necessarily related."
But yeah, I am done, now. My head hurts too.
-
I wrote a blog post about the correlation (not necessarily causation) between the arrest warrant and Assange's increased public profile (using those celebrated critical thinking tools I have) and, as I did so, my hosting provider decided that they needed to upgrade the MySQL databases, rolling the database back to April 10th in the process. Now my post has gone away and I have an even bigger headache than I had when I started trying to disentangle this affair.
-
Perhaps the Swedish authorities, when the cables were leaked, went “We need to act with regard to this investigation sooner rather than later because we now have good reason to think Assange will go to ground.”
Um, yes -- I'd recommend another look at the interview with Claes Borgström,Russell linked to earlier.
The unusual circumstances surrounding the initial handling of the alleged assault have been used by Assange's online supporters to fan suspicions about the case. Why was an investigation launched by the Swedish prosecutors before being dropped and then revived? Why did the women, who had not previously known each other, go together to the police to report the assaults? Why was an extradition required when Assange had earlier been allowed to leave Sweden?
Borgström attempted to refute this speculation point by point today. He would not say where the women were, only that he was in daily contact with them. He had advised them not to read what was being said about them on the internet, he said. "But they do …"
There was nothing unusual about different prosecutors, of varying seniority, coming to different conclusions about whether a crime had occurred, he said. Rape was rarely a clear-cut case of an unknown man pouncing on a woman, he said, and this case, like most, was nuanced and complicated.
He refused to reveal sensitive details of the evidence provided to him by the women. "It is important for the future investigation that the suspect himself does not know more than necessary before he is interrogated by the Swedish police," he said.
But he gave a concise summary of the key allegations. "These two women were molested by Mr Julian Assange at two different times, independently of each other," he said. One of the two women, who met Assange at a lecture he gave in Stockholm in August, wanted to contact him after the alleged assault because she wanted him to take a test for sexually transmitted infections. She contacted the second woman, who had helped organise the lecture, to see if she could help her to find him. "When they spoke to each other they realised they had been through something very similar so they went to the police. That's not odd," he said.
"They decided to go to the police, to inform the police of what happened, to ask for advice; also they were interested in whether there was a risk that they could have got HIV. They were not sure whether they should make a police complaint, they wanted to have some advice. But when they told the police officer, she realised that what they were telling her was a crime and she reported that to the public prosecutor, who decided to arrest Assange."
Two days later a second prosecutor, who conducted a preliminary investigation, came to a different conclusion, judging that the evidence did not meet the criterion of a rape or sexual molestation charge. "She made another judgment, saying: 'No it's not. It's very close, but not quite,'" he claimed. "So she cancelled the arrest order and he was still suspected of molestation without sexual motives.
"When I read that decision, my own conclusion was and still is that it was a rape, so I asked for a reopening of the case, and then the investigation was reopened." There was nothing suspicious about this closing and reopening of the case, he said. "The law is not an exact science. You can always make different judgments. Different courts and different prosecutors make different decisions. I think that the prosecutor who cancelled the arrest warrant did not study the case well enough."
Assange was at that time free to leave the country, Borgström said. "He didn't have to ask anyone if he could." It was only later when it appeared that Assange was unwilling to return voluntarily for questioning that the extradition process was launched, he said.
"It turned out it was impossible to get him here for an interrogation, he wanted to be interrogated in the embassy, or wherever. Then the prosecutor decided to arrest him," he said.
[...]Whether Assange will be prosecuted in Sweden on the four charges of rape, sexual molestation, and coercion against him depends on whether or not the Swedish director of prosecutions, Marianne Ny, finds enough evidence to be confident that the case will stand up in court. Before she does that, she needs to question Assange further, and may also need to question the women again.
The probability of the prosecution going ahead is around 50-50, or perhaps a little more than that, Borgström said.
"In Sweden, like in other countries, the burden of proof lies upon the prosecutor. The prosecutor must prove beyond reasonable doubt that a client is guilty of the crimes. Beyond reasonable doubt is very high – I don't know whether she can reach that level. And history tells you that you can reach different judgments on the same material depending on how you interpret that material."
If you really want to conspiratorial about it, is Assange himself the real puppet master here? A cynic could say it's hardly doing his "brand" any harm with the true believers to be able to represent as the victim of politically motivated right-wing "sexual Stalinism" (to quote one of the more unhappy coinages to come out of Bill Clinton's impeachment).
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
But yeah, I am done, now. My head hurts too.
Yeah -- pretty shitty day today. All kinds of technical and logistic issues with Public Address Radio, not helped by being in a pretty fragile state writing about this. I was hired to be the token Tory on PAR, looking back on a fair swag of my recent pieces not sure I'm entirely comfortable being the resident angry feminist as well. To bed with Wodehouse, methinks.
-
Jeeves will know how to fix what ails you. Don't, whatever you do, take advice from Bertie.
-
Neil Morrison, in reply to
Assange and his supporters are doing exactly what they consider most evil.
The most sanctimonious people are always they ones to watch out for. Graham Capill comes to mind, amongst others.
-
oh, so they are killing hundreds of people on a daily basis using high-tech weaponery paid for by taxpayers and lying to the world about it, all from a prison cell in south london with no internet access and three minutes on the phone to his lawyer. wow, he really is scary, eh?
-
I'm feeling kind of sweet right now, most likely for reasons unrelated to Assange at all, but it does make me doubt the evil of speculating on the outcomes of his court case. What's wrong with the odd idle conspiracy theory to lay your prejudices out plain? I reckon he's a victim of a postmodern conspiracy.
I like to make it clear that I feel this way because I know virtually nothing about postmodernism and am highly resistant to finding out anything more. They don't want me to know, so it would be futile.
-
Steve Parks, in reply to
It’s not crazy for a man who turned up in the UK with no record of him having entered the country to be regarded as a flight risk.
But, why would the flight risk turn himself in? The judge said something about how Assange would be able to disappear. If so, why wouldn’t he just go ahead and do so? Why turn himself in to the authorities in the hope he’d be granted bail, so that he could do what he could have done prior to giving himself up?
Not suggesting the judge is part of some conspiracy, but the decision not to grant bail seems overly cautious, to say the least. -
Sadly, a couple of people I follow on Twitter have already reported their servers being caught in the crossfire. All this macho talk about “infowar” gets on my tits a bit.
You can access Twitter.
-
Megan Wegan, in reply to
I was hired to be the token Tory on PAR, looking back on a fair swag of my recent pieces not sure I’m entirely comfortable being the resident angry feminist as well.
But we are glad you are, my love. For my part, I am a bit sick of explaining consent, only to be told that I am over-reacting.
Not suggesting the judge is part of some conspiracy, but the decision not to grant bail seems overly cautious, to say the least.
Probably entirely understandably, though.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
It is cautious to hold him in remand, but the flight risk does seem quite real for reasons the judge gave. He's not British, and he did enter the country without going through any passport control, which suggests he could leave the same way.
I actually think he's safer in custody at the moment. That's the flipside of all this secretive ghosting around that he does - that he could easily disappear, and everyone might think he's just gone to ground, when in fact he's been 'rendered'.
-
All this macho talk about “infowar” gets on my tits a bit.
And it also seems to be tipping over into cyber-harassment and intimidation:
Mr. Housh acknowledged that there had been online talk among the hackers of a possible Internet campaign against the two women who have been Mr. Assange’s accusers in the Swedish case, but he said that “a lot of people don’t want to be involved.”
A Web search showed new blog posts in recent days in which the two women, identified by the Swedish prosecutors only as Ms. A. and Ms. W., were named, but it was not clear whether there was any link to Anonymous.
Very macho -- goobye #wikileaks, hello #wikicreeps. Am I the only person smell the faint odour of whale oil?
-
Keep an eye out for OpenLeaks on Monday. Or so a few forum-posts on 4chan and elsewhere say. Seems like there's a movement that thinks WikiLeaks is just too closely linked with Mr Assange.
-
Seems like there's a movement that thinks WikiLeaks is just too closely linked with Mr Assange.
Don't worry, I'm sure the minute they procure anything of significance there'll be a long line of character assassins lining up to discredit them.
Oh, and endangering lives.
-
Angus Robertson, in reply to
I don't know how many times in the past 2 days I have said "There's a sexual assault charge, and there's Wikileaks. These two things are not necessarily related."
Perhaps seperate threads:
One for Wikileaks and the assorted revelations of diplomatic leakage.
And one for Julain Assange's sex life and legal troubles.
Very macho -- goobye #wikileaks, hello #wikicreeps. Am I the only person smell the faint odour of whale oil?
Having to wade through 13 tonnes of hearsay, innuendo and assorted filth to reach any nuggets of interest - the Whale Oil effect.
-
Sacha, in reply to
And for those complaining about the dumbing down of journalism, just look at which of those two options this thread has returned to time after time..
-
Indeed.
-
Psst, guys, you notice how there're more comments on this page about how important it is to talk about the cables and not about the allegations than there are about the cables and the allegations combined?
I reckon if we stop talking about how no one talks about the cables and start talking about the cables, there might end up being a whole discussion about the cables.
Not that I'm game to start, of course, personally being completely tabloid.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.