Don't be so fucking naive. There's a world of difference between a violent, forced sex attack and what Mr Assange is accused of. 'Categorising' is a pointless exercise, but by the same token it's completely inappropriate and offensive to victims of forced sex to equate what they have experienced to what Assange is accused of.

For the record, I do think Assange is a dick* and should answer to the charges against him in Sweden.


There's an interesting article on the Guardian from December 2010 which goes into a bit more detail of the charges than what most current news reports do. To my mind** it seems like a case of 3 people making a bunch of stupid decisions that they later regret.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden


*regardless of the charges

**and of course my view is totally irellevant - I am neither an involved party nor someone with the required legal and social experience of Swedish culture and justice system to pass any form of moral judgement.

I think you're completely wrong, so let's leave it there.

Alternatively, you could state why you think that and we could have some kind of meaningful debate on a very sensitive and important topic, hopefully widening understandings and making the world (at least the very small corners that Teh touches) a slightly better place to exist.

 

Or we could shut down debate because OMG RAPE.

 

 

the case against Assange in Sweeden was blatantly re-opened in order to get him somewhere that would pass him on to the US, no question

the case was dropped once, but re-started once the big-boys wanted to talk to him

it really doesn't take a huge leap to join the dots

>>It appears to me that his excuse for not doing what anyone else would be expected to do is that wiki leaks is too important in terms of free speech and open-ness and that he should somehow be treated differently. That's complete rubbish, he's an individual and nobody's that important.

 

It would seem that there is a genuine risk of him ending up in the States if he returned to Sweden, which would be reason enough for any sane person to want to stay away.

 

As others have stated, he has offered to be interviewed in London and the Ecuadorian embassy, and although that's not 'normal' procedure it's certainly doable - I'm pretty sure I read about the Swedes interviewing a suspected murderer in a foreign country, but can't see the link just now.

 

I think he should be treated differently because of the Wikileaks connection and the very real possibility of political persecution because of that.

 

There are plenty of cases where things have been done out with the normal procedure for a court because of the potential political consequences for the individuals involved - for instance we went as far as setting up a Scottish law court in the Netherlands to try Abdelbaset al-Megrahi for the bombing of Pan Am 103.

I didn't read every post., but I guarantee that if they extradited him to the US he would disappear very quickly. I don't know where they hide these people but our government is good at it.

Disappear in a bad way...

Like the invisible man? It could have perks though.

Just ask 53. He can probably tell you all about it!

Do you know about Denver Airport?

You are very funny.

No access to that photo.

http://www.tehforum.co.uk/forum/lmessages.php?webtag=DEFAULT&msg=39806.2

Not just you.

I thought it was a secret Iluminati nuke base.

It really wasn't worth the effort...a link to a photo of a badge on worthpoint. The guy is cracked.

It would appear that Equador's actions have also offended another, more powerful authority.

 

Either God or Gaia is on the side of Great British justice. Take that Jules:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-19331923