wikileaks

[srijantje]

it's hard to believe he actually said that about theft,how dum can you be?

[thethingy]

it's hard to believe he actually said that about theft,how dum can you be?

Its hard to believe that they are discussing exclusivity agreements and publishing rights as it's not actually there data in the first place and anyone considering leaking something to wiki will now know 100% that wiki will commercialise on it first and will be making cash for themselves prior to any leaks being made public, I don't think that profiting from leaks is in the spirit of freedom of information or freedom of speech.

[srijantje]

you're absolutely right there
what happened to the rest of the crew who were going to start a new site?[forgot the name]

[thethingy]

Wikileaks' Julian Assange 'would be denied justice'



There is a risk of "flagrant denial of justice" if Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is tried for rape in Sweden, his lawyer has told a UK court.

Geoffrey Robertson QC fears his client could face the death penalty if extradited to the US on separate charges relating to Wikileaks.

But prosecutors say any threat of unfair treatment would see the European Court of Human Rights intervene.

Mr Assange, 39, denies claims of sexual assault against two women.

His lawyers told the extradition hearing in London he was "willing and able" to co-operate with Swedish authorities, so no arrest warrant was needed.

They said the European Arrest Warrant under which he had been detained was invalid because he had not yet been charged.

Mr Robertson told Belmarsh Magistrates' Court there was a risk his client could be extradited to the US, or even Guantanamo Bay, and could face the death penalty as a result.

He said Swedish rape trials were regularly "tried in secret behind closed doors in a flagrant denial of justice".

In a document released by Mr Assange's defence team, they argued that:

Slow progress in Assange case - crown barrister says he's not sure we'll even get a decision tomorrow”

In a document released by Mr Assange's defence team, they argued that:

* Swedish prosecutor Marianne Nye is "not eligible" or an appropriate "judicial authority" to issue a European Arrest Warrant
* The Swedes are guilty of an "abuse of process" as they have not demonstrated any intention to charge or prosecute Mr Assange
* The application for a warrant is "disproportionate" as he is willing to co-operate and be interviewed by phone, e-mail or videolink
* The arrest warrant paperwork is not valid as it does not "unequivocally" state that he is wanted for prosecution
* The offences Mr Assange faces - unlawful coercion and sexual molestation - are not criminal acts under British law; and
* Extraditing Mr Assange to Sweden would be a "real risk of a flagrant denial of justice" and a "blatant breach" of British constitutional principles.

Mr Robertson also said the extensive press coverage surrounding events risked a "trial by media".

He said front-page articles had described his client as a coward for refusing to return to Sweden.

"There's a danger this kind of media campaign, media vilification, will prejudice this secret trial," he told the court.

He also attacked the conditions Mr Assange could be held in if extradited to Sweden, saying the remand prison in Gothenburg had been criticised for its treatment of foreign prisoners.

Retired Swedish appeal court judge Brita Sundberg-Weitman, who was called as a witness, attacked Mr Assange's treatment by the authorities.

She said his case had been "extremely peculiar" from the start and criticised the authorities for revealing he was under investigation for rape.

"An authority must never use more harsh means than what is necessary for the objective. It is obvious this principle has not been respected here at all," she said.

"I can hardly imagine how, on suspicion of a sexual offence, you can do more harm to a person than has been done in this case.

"He [Mr Assange] is famous all over the world as a rapist and he has not even been charged."

But Clare Montgomery QC, representing the Swedish authorities, argued the Australian must face charges of rape and sexual molestation following the accusation of two women.

She told the court rape is one of 32 offences that warrants extradition, and Mr Assange was accused of having sex with one woman without a condom, despite her saying she would only consent if he wore one.

The other woman's claims implicitly suggested a lack of consent, she added.

"Mr Assange, by using violence, forced Miss A to endure him restricting her freedom of movement, taking hold of her arms, forcefully spreading her legs and lying on top of her," she said.

"Violently forcing yourself on someone and causing them to endure your lying on top of them can only be understood as violent, unlawful coercion, as action taken without... consent."

She also denied Swedish prosecutor Ms Nye was not authorised to issue the arrest warrant and said Mr Assange was wanted for prosecution not merely interrogation.

The whistle-blowing website has been used to publish leaked US diplomatic cables, as well as other sensitive material from governments and high-profile organisations.

Mr Assange arrived at court under an intense media spotlight, and supported by a number of high-profile campaigners including Bianca Jagger, Jemima Khan and veteran politician Tony Benn.

The Australian had his bail conditions amended so he could leave his adopted home in Norfolk to spend the night in Paddington, west London.

Several witnesses are expected to be called to court on Tuesday, and district judge Howard Riddle may yet reserve his judgement to a later date.

Mr Assange was released on bail by a High Court judge just before Christmas after spending nine days in Wandsworth prison.

He denies sexually assaulting two female supporters during a visit to Stockholm in August and claims the inquiry is politically motivated.

The extradition hearing is expected to last two days.

Source

[thethingy]

Julian Assange's British lawyers are covering all the bases.
He has obviously been able to purchase top notch legal representation.

You know I thought that was something they just put out to the press but not for use in the court;

* Swedish prosecutor Marianne Nye is "not eligible" or an appropriate "judicial authority" to issue a European Arrest Warrant

^^ that I think is interesting and stands a good chance of succeeding but there is nothing to stop the appropriate person issuing another or amended warrant.

* The Swedes are guilty of an "abuse of process" as they have not demonstrated any intention to charge or prosecute Mr Assange

^^ I think the warrant in itself demonstrates intent.

* The application for a warrant is "disproportionate" as he is willing to co-operate and be interviewed by phone, e-mail or videolink

^^ I think that don't really matter as typically you would need to be physically arrested and have your rights explained before any conversations can be used against you.

* The arrest warrant paperwork is not valid as it does not "unequivocally" state that he is wanted for prosecution

^^ It does say he is wanted for arrest though, people do get extradited to face charges I think.

* The offences Mr Assange faces - unlawful coercion and sexual molestation - are not criminal acts under British law

^^ The offences can be interpreted to English law, if what the girls are saying is true then its sexual assault & rape.

* Extraditing Mr Assange to Sweden would be a "real risk of a flagrant denial of justice" and a "blatant breach" of British constitutional principles.

^^ Don't think that will concern the court as Britain & Sweden both operate under the European Human Rights legislation so the trial is guaranteed to be fair but I do think the court has to way up the possible unfairness the media attention will have on his trial against the rights of the two women to have access to justice.

[billy]

the openleaks founder has is book out now but i can't get a copy of it anywhere.
i personally think the assange show is dying a slow death. nobody cares any more. wiki and he will fade into obscurity.

[srijantje]

and anyway,they'll still want to nail him

[billy]

Don't be so sure about that.
All it takes is another big scoop, and WikiLeaks is front and center again.

i can't see it. i think now people who want to whistle will go else where. they've seen what happened to manning, they've heard from a wikileaks core worker that sources weren't kept safe enough. and they've seen that assange isn't someone you'd trust, he lacks integrity and he's shown the fact to be true. he was in it for the cash the fame and the kudos. the good thing to come from it all is a better way to leak stuff. hopefully openleaks will do a better job of it.

sj; i think the usa don't actually give a rats ass anymore. the fact he's making a twat of himself all over the media is probably enough for them. in fact he's probably doing what they could never do.

[srijantje]

no, bill,i don't believe that,wait until they get Manning to say Asange set him up to get the stuff and they will want him extradited and put away for a long time,just to make an example.

[billy]

maybe but personally i'll err on the side of thinking they don't want to make a martyr of him.
that said, i am surprised manning hasn't seen a court room yet.

[srijantje]

he's a soldier,prob.will get court martiall ed

[thethingy]

sj; i think the usa don't actually give a rats ass anymore. the fact he's making a twat of himself all over the media is probably enough for them. in fact he's probably doing what they could never do.

I think the US do care and are just biding there time to get him, if they act now his deportation will be delayed for years so perhaps they just wait till that's done and dusted then they get him, Julian's time limits in the EU must be nearing kick out time soon so I think either way after this extradition stuff he will have to leave Europe then I think the Us will get him with ease when he eventually goes home to Australia.

[billy]

for bob (showing him the evil of the world)

Assange abused my cat: WikiLeaks insider

(AFP) – 7 hours ago

BERLIN — Daniel Domscheit-Berg accuses WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange of many things in his book presented Thursday, but perhaps the oddest allegation is that he abused the former insider's cat.

"Julian was constantly battling for dominance, even with my tomcat Herr Schmitt," Domscheit-Berg says in his book "Inside WikiLeaks: My Time with Julian Assange at the World's Most Dangerous Website."

"Ever since Julian lived with me in Wiesbaden he (the cat) has suffered from psychosis. Julian would constantly attack the animal. He would spread out his fingers like a fork and grab the cat's throat."

The "mad Australian" did not always come off best during his stay in 2009, however, with Herr Schmitt sometimes managing to "dispatch Julian with a quick swipe of the paw."

"It must have been a nightmare for the tomcat," he said in the German-language version of the book, due to be published in more than a dozen countries from Friday.

---

it seems the gloves are off and it's part of the reason i was saying wikileaks is a done deal in the "it's over stakes"

Updated with Daniel Domscheit-Berg’s response below.

Things have gotten ugly between WikiLeaks and Daniel Domscheit-Berg, the former staffer at the secret-spilling site who left in September of last year.

On Wednesday, an excerpt of his forthcoming book, Inside WikiLeaks, leaked out to the document repository site Cryptome. The excerpt criticizes Assange’s character, his attitude towards women, and his honesty. Most importantly, it claims that defectors from WikiLeaks have taken control of the site’s submissions system and some portion of its leaked materials in the interest of protecting the group’s anonymous sources.

it's apretty interesting read that mainly shows assange to be bit girly in how he retaliates. source;

[thethingy]

Assange criticism by Sweden PM 'damages trial process'



Criticism of Julian Assange by Sweden's prime minister could damage his chance of a fair trial, a UK extradition hearing has been told.

Fredrik Reinfeldt's remarks had shown "complete contempt for the presumption of innocence", said Geoffrey Robertson QC, representing the Wikileaks founder.

The Swedish authorities' lawyer denied that Mr Assange, 39, had been vilified.

Sweden wants to extradite Mr Assange over alleged sexual assaults on two women, which he denies.

At Belmarsh Magistrates' Court in south-east London, Mr Robertson told the hearing that the prime minister's comments this week had created a "toxic atmosphere" in Sweden.

They included claims that Mr Assange and his lawyers had been "condescending and damaging to Sweden", and implied they thought women's rights were worthless, Mr Robertson said.

"Mr Assange is public enemy number one as a result of the prime minister's statement," he said.

Clare Montgomery QC, for the Swedish authorities, denied that the prime minister had vilified Mr Assange.

"You might think those who seek to fan the flames of a media firestorm can't be surprised when they get burnt," she said.

On the final day of the extradition hearing on Friday, the judge said he was minded to take two weeks to decide on the possible removal to Sweden.

Mr Assange, an Australian citizen, was released on bail by a High Court judge in December after spending nine days in Wandsworth prison.

He denies sexually assaulting two female supporters during a visit to Stockholm in August and says the Swedish investigation is politically motivated.

source

[billy]

for a man who is a proponent of free speech and freedom of the press, he doesn't half charge a lot.
(well i'm not sure to be honest) but daniel says assange charged the guardian for the leaked helicopter vid. if it's true
then it sort of puts him in a bad light. charging for leaks seems a bit nasty, i'm still a bit shocked that they w/leaks only gave mannings defence team 20 thousand. how much is assange making ? it has to be a fair old amount taking book and film rights into account, i couldn't give a toss how much he has to pay his lawyers, thats his own stupid fault.

[thethingy]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00...ret_Story/

was quite interesting, should be on the iplayer in an hour or so.

[srijantje]

not available in my area,sadly

[billy]

not available in my area,sadly

just google panarama wikileaks

here's another source that isn't iplayer sj;

panarama

i think it will open the eyes of some but i saw nothing in the documentary
that i didn't already know or hadn't already heard. there was no new revelations as such. (apart from the fact that no one but julien knew or had contact with Ishmael (sp) the anti Semite and that he actually advised him to use a pen name even though he thought the allegations of anti Semite were wrong. i really do think the majority see assange for what he really is. the longer the story plays out the more he'll be seen as the man who killed wikileaks.

[addy]

Wouldn't wikileaks be better of just ditching this guy? He's not even trying to hide the fact that he's a megalomaniac. I agree that future whistleblowers will no longer want to work with wikileaks/Assange... whistleblowers leak info because they want to reveal injustices, but how would they feel if they give info that Julian Assange then decides to hostage for his own benefit (to squeeze more money from his donors and for media deals), claiming the leaks as "his" property to use at his whim? Friend to whistleblowers he is not.

[srijantje]

is this the end of whistle blowing?is assange working for the usa government now?nobody could do more than him to bring discredit to whistle blowing