Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

WikiLeaks' Assange Hopes To Exit London Embassy "Soon"

samzenpus posted about 1 month ago | from the leaving-the-building dept.

Crime 299

An anonymous reader writes Julian Assange has hosted a press conference in which he indicated he is soon about to leave the embassy of Ecuador in London. From the article: "WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who has spent over two years in Ecuador's London embassy to avoid a sex crimes inquiry in Sweden, said on Monday he planned to leave the building 'soon', but Britain signaled it would still arrest him if he tried. Assange made the surprise assertion during a news conference alongside Ecuador's Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino. But his spokesman played down the chances of an imminent departure, saying the British government would first need to revise its position and let him leave without arrest, something it has repeatedly refused to do.

cancel ×

299 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Hello! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696311)

Over here! Look at me! I'm still here!

Re:Hello! (5, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | about 1 month ago | (#47696331)

Yea Snowden really took his thunder away.

Re:Hello! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696579)

But I won't be for long, so you best look now!

Hello! Hello? Anyone there?

Re:Hello! (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47697043)

Did you expose government corruption, lies, murder, abuse of Constitution, etc? Then nobody cares about your aggrandizement.

How many years could he be charged with? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696317)

I bet he could work out a deal with Sweden for time served.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696381)

He is not scared of being put in jail in Sweden. He is shitting bricks over the thought of Sweden handing him over to the Americans.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (1, Insightful)

peragrin (659227) | about 1 month ago | (#47696533)

Except per Swedish and EU law tht would be illegal.

I dot know why you people keep bringing it up.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (5, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | about 1 month ago | (#47696563)

Except per Swedish and EU law tht would be illegal. I dot know why you people keep bringing it up.

That doesn't mean it won't happen.

I don't think it will, but stranger things have happened and I understand his concern.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 1 month ago | (#47696679)

If he were to be extradited, it would be by the UK.

I havent followed this circus too closely (nor am I an expert on extradition law) but I dont believe he has been charged in the US, however, so Im not clear how he would be extradited.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (1)

i kan reed (749298) | about 1 month ago | (#47696779)

I'm pretty sure it's covered under the *nudge nudge* *wink wink* international protocol.

No, but really, I'm not entirely convinced of the US's dedication to smashing Snowden, myself, but I'm also familiar with the whole "international governance by fiat" that's been a favorite a favorite foreign policy of ours for at least a decade now.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (2, Insightful)

BitZtream (692029) | about a month ago | (#47697015)

'nudge nudge' 'wink wink' would have simply put a bullet in his head over 2 years ago if they wanted to. The only person who cares about what Assange says at this point is himself. No intelligent person gives a shit what he says anymore, he's proven repeatedly that he's nothing more than an attention whore who twists things to promote his own personal agenda.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (3, Funny)

i kan reed (749298) | about a month ago | (#47697029)

Oh no. An attention whore? Involved in politics? How unprecedented.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (3, Insightful)

metrix007 (200091) | about 1 month ago | (#47696589)

Are you really so naive to think the law matters in a case like this?

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (2)

Shatrat (855151) | about 1 month ago | (#47696603)

If it didn't matter, he wouldn't be safe in an embassy either.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (5, Insightful)

the grace of R'hllor (530051) | about 1 month ago | (#47696707)

There's law, and there's international diplomacy. If they yank him out of an embassy, every embassy is at risk of wanton search, and you can say goodbye to diplomatic immunity. If, at some point, Sweden extradites Assange to the US and there's a bit of outcry, they'll say "Oops, maybe we shouldn't have done that", and there will be no repercussions (except for Assange).

I haven't heard Sweden state that they will categorically not extradite him to the US, though.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47696991)

There's law, and there's international diplomacy. If they yank him out of an embassy, every embassy is at risk of wanton search, and you can say goodbye to diplomatic immunity. If, at some point, Sweden extradites Assange to the US and there's a bit of outcry, they'll say "Oops, maybe we shouldn't have done that", and there will be no repercussions (except for Assange).

I haven't heard Sweden state that they will categorically not extradite him to the US, though.

Really?

The Iranians got away with doing a lot worse than that.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696713)

Maybe they are already poisoning him. Wouldn't be the first victim of state sanctioned polonium poisoning (or something similar)

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about 1 month ago | (#47696901)

Good point. It could be possible to tamper with the embassy's water supply in such a way that the effects would only be felt by someone who *lives* there...

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696617)

I don't know much about Sweden, but there is no other place where I think law would matter more than that country.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (4, Funny)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about 1 month ago | (#47696785)

I know almost nothing about cars. Allow me to provide a car analogy ....

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696683)

It was also illegal in the EU for poland to host a CIA torture site. That doesn't mean it didn't happen. Its illegality is small comfort to those that suffered there. If not illegal, it was extremely uncouth for France, Spain, Portugal and Austria to collude in bringing down the Bolivian Presidential plane down to search it for Snowden. I get the impression that most western European countries seem to be quite happy to ignore their laws and customs if the US government asks/tells them to.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696719)

Except per Swedish and EU law that would be illegal.

Only if he's charged with a capital crime. All the US has to do is take the death penalty out of the equation, and then it's legal.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (4, Interesting)

fredan (54788) | about 1 month ago | (#47696809)

No, you are wrong.

We (Sweden) have a separate agreement with the U.S. regarding this. That's why he's scared of being transported to the U.S. from Sweden.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (1)

cycler (31440) | about a month ago | (#47697081)

Right.

And the UK wouldn't have the same were Assange voluntarily stayed be his own will??

Reference link or your information is not correct

/C

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47697139)

No, you are wrong.

We (Sweden) have a separate agreement with the U.S. regarding this. That's why he's scared of being transported to the U.S. from Sweden.

Yeah, but the guards handing him over are all beautiful naked blond women, right?

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (1)

ClintJCL (264898) | about 1 month ago | (#47696833)

Because it hasn't stopped it from happening in the past! DUH.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47696975)

Kickbacks are illegal, but that doesn't mean the British government aren't getting any.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 1 month ago | (#47696663)

Right, because the extradition treaties between Sweden and the US are so much stronger than the ones between us and the UK?

assange is... (4, Insightful)

harvey the nerd (582806) | about 1 month ago | (#47696821)

...is shitting bricks over the thought of Sweden handing him over to the Americans

...handing him over to the despotic occupiers of the US government. FTFY.
The US is totally off its constitutional rails.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (3, Insightful)

nbauman (624611) | about 1 month ago | (#47696385)

I bet he could work out a deal with Sweden for time served.

If the Swedish charges against him were legitimate he could.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696507)

It's always interesting when the left becomes misogynistic in order to defend their guy.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (-1, Flamebait)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | about 1 month ago | (#47696547)

Wow somebody on the right champion women's rights....pigs must be flying....

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (3, Funny)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 1 month ago | (#47696697)

I dont know about pigs, but I think I saw a strawman shooting across the room a minute ago...

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (1)

machineghost (622031) | about 1 month ago | (#47696647)

I don't think anyone on the left (well, very few) would defend him if an arrangement could be made where he would just face the misogynistic charges. Sweden is a democratic country with a faire legal system, and I think most people would be happy to see Assange go through that system.

The problem is that the moment Assange steps on Swedish soil (or even outside the embassay) he's got a very good chance of being put on a one-way ticket to America to face much worse charges, in a court which is much less fair.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (1, Insightful)

BitZtream (692029) | about a month ago | (#47697075)

Bullshit.

If he was going to be shipped to the US, England would have done it in the time they had the opportunity to do so well before he went into the embassy. You do realize there was plenty of time to do so right? No, oh thats right, you're just ignoring reality and using the tiny bits of silly things that you want to use to put assange on some silly pedestal.

If you really believe that he's afraid of Sweden shipping him to the US, you're an ignorant moron.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (0)

cycler (31440) | about a month ago | (#47697191)

Will you guys stop this nonsense?

He will NOT be deported to the US by us.
Mostly, he hasn't been charged with ANYTHING in the US!
If he would, it cannot be a capital offence since Sweden will NOT send anyone anywhere if they face a death penalty.

He lived over a year in a country with much more ties to the US _without_ being set on a one-way plane:
The UK

One also wonders why someone that has stated fears that a ???-acronym will tempt him with women offering sex couldn't keep it in his pants?

/C

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (2)

phantomfive (622387) | about 1 month ago | (#47696569)

If the Swedish charges against him were legitimate he could.

Are you suggesting......it might not have been a legitimate rape?

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (3, Insightful)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about 1 month ago | (#47696811)

The Swedes certainly are, or they would have issued a warrant for his arrest rather than for questioning.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (1)

ericloewe (2129490) | about a month ago | (#47696935)

Just what we need, arrest first and ask questions later. Should they also shoot people first and ask questions later?

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (2)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about a month ago | (#47697011)

"Just what we need, arrest first and ask questions later."

When there is proof of a crime then yes, that's how it is done. You don't seem to understand how this whole legal system thing works. Do you really think that cops never arrest people first and then ask questions? You might need to watch an episode or two of Law and Order, which, for all its inaccuracies, at least portrays that realistically.

" Should they also shoot people first and ask questions later?"

Only in cases where people come up with non-sequiters as phenomenally stupid as yours.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (5, Insightful)

nbauman (624611) | about a month ago | (#47697021)

If the Swedish charges against him were legitimate he could.

Are you suggesting......it might not have been a legitimate rape?

Under Swedish law, when you have sex with your girlfriend, you've raped her if you have a fling with a young chick afterwards.

You had sex with her under false pretenses: giving her the impression that she's your girlfriend now.

Sweden is a feminist paradise.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47697275)

It was not.

Swedish law is hilarious in this regard, because it is a feminazi paradise, sadly.

And worse yet, the instant anyone even wanted to go fully official with it, this supposed female just vanished in to the air.
But they are still going ahead with the case, even though it has literally 0 bases to stand on since the accuser stood down and walked away.
But, hey, rape, muh feminisms, etc.

Sweden, after America, is one of the last places I would ever want to live, despite the overall decent quality of life it has.
The stupid law system breaks the deal for me. (and I say this living in... the UK of all places)

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (1)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 1 month ago | (#47696573)

If the Swedish charges against him were legitimate he could.

He has not ben charged as far as I know, there's only allegations. What's not legitimate about that?

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (4, Insightful)

nbauman (624611) | about a month ago | (#47697061)

If the Swedish charges against him were legitimate he could.

He has not ben charged as far as I know, there's only allegations. What's not legitimate about that?

I'm not fond of conspiracy theories, but when his unnameable accuser turns out to have been on the payroll of a group funded by the Central Intelligence Agency, working in Cuba to "assist" the Cuban people develop democracy, I have to wonder.

Re:How many years could he be charged with? (3, Insightful)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 1 month ago | (#47696687)

You cant get "time served" for time you spent in a safe house evading the law. It doesnt work that way.

UK Law has changed. (1)

jaeztheangel (2644535) | about 1 month ago | (#47696355)

Or is very soon about to, he has access to one of the top lawyers in the country (who also happens to date George Clooney) and wouldn't make this announcement if it could be easily repudiated. I guess this is his way of testing the waters, and calling the banners before he sets out...

Re:UK Law has changed. (-1, Flamebait)

CheezburgerBrown . (3417019) | about 1 month ago | (#47696379)

They are moving to sharia law and therefore his sex crimes were justified

Re:UK Law has changed. (3, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | about 1 month ago | (#47696409)

Nah, they make him prime minister of Italy and everything's gonna be a-ok.

Re:UK Law has changed. (2)

GungaDan (195739) | about 1 month ago | (#47696539)

"Nah, they make him prime minister of Italy and everything's gonna be ok-a."

^ FTFY

Re:UK Law has changed. (4, Informative)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about 1 month ago | (#47696827)

What sex crimes? I'm unaware of any government anywhere that has charged him with any sex crimes.

Re:UK Law has changed. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47697175)

Sex by surprise (It is a crime in the feminist state of Sweden and nowhere else on the planet).

Re:UK Law has changed. (1)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about a month ago | (#47697257)

There is no such law in Sweden. Even if there was such a law, he hasn't been charged with anything.

Re:UK Law has changed. (0)

BitZtream (692029) | about a month ago | (#47697103)

...

Right, because he's more than a nobody attention whore who does anything and everything he can to stay in the spotlight, manipulating facts to suit his own personal agenda ...

This is his way to get attention, nothing more.

Diplomatic pouch? (1)

nbauman (624611) | about 1 month ago | (#47696377)

I thought that embassy officials and their property had diplomatic immunity. (I remember stories about drugs being smuggled in diplomatic pouches.)

Suppose they drove a van into the embassy, Assange got in (or didn't get in), and they drove it out to an airport.

Wouldn't the van be covered by diplomatic immunity, and immune to being searched?

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696391)

No, the diplomats are covered and their personal belongings. The vehicle they travel in is not covered.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 1 month ago | (#47696415)

So essentially all Ecuador has to do is give him citizenship and declare him a diplomat?

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (4, Informative)

TechyImmigrant (175943) | about 1 month ago | (#47696467)

>So essentially all Ecuador has to do is give him citizenship and declare him a diplomat?

No, the host country has to agree to the designation as well.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696651)

But if the UK agreed that would solve the problem, right?

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (1)

Yebyen (59663) | about a month ago | (#47696933)

Solve what problem? The UK are the ones who are waiting with baited breath that want to arrest him, I don't see why they would agree to this.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (1)

Ecuador (740021) | about 1 month ago | (#47696667)

If it were up to me and that simple, it would have been done already.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (1)

Quimo (72752) | about 1 month ago | (#47696653)

Diplomatic property cannot be entered or searched (including vehicles.) Getting him out of the car onto the plane may be an issue though.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (1)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 1 month ago | (#47696661)

There are plenty of cargo planes which you can easily drive a car into.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696657)

What if the vehicle is a personal belonging of the diplomat? If that doesn't work, what if Assange becomes a diplomat's bitch? Would he be covered then?

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (1)

nbauman (624611) | about a month ago | (#47696963)

What if the vehicle is a personal belonging of the diplomat?
If that doesn't work, what if Assange becomes a diplomat's bitch? Would he be covered then?

I think he had enough trouble with Swedish girlfriends. He shouldn't mess with Venezuelan girlfriends at this point.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696435)

I thought that embassy officials and their property had diplomatic immunity. (I remember stories about drugs being smuggled in diplomatic pouches.)

Suppose they drove a van into the embassy, Assange got in (or didn't get in), and they drove it out to an airport.

Wouldn't the van be covered by diplomatic immunity, and immune to being searched?

I guess we'll know soon enough if he scraped together enough money to buy the van option after hiring his attorney.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (3, Funny)

ZipK (1051658) | about 1 month ago | (#47696437)

Suppose they drove a van into the embassy, Assange got in (or didn't get in), and they drove it out to an airport.

Your plan is close, but you would actually need a man-sized diplomatic pouch, large enough for Assange to crouch within, with the zipper fully closed with a diplomatic seal. He'd need to stay in the pouch until his plane was outside territorial airspace.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (5, Informative)

Theaetetus (590071) | about 1 month ago | (#47696795)

Suppose they drove a van into the embassy, Assange got in (or didn't get in), and they drove it out to an airport.

Your plan is close, but you would actually need a man-sized diplomatic pouch, large enough for Assange to crouch within, with the zipper fully closed with a diplomatic seal. He'd need to stay in the pouch until his plane was outside territorial airspace.

The "diplomatic pouch" concept comes from the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, art. 27:

Art. 27(3): The diplomatic bag shall not be opened or detained.

However, the next section kills your plan:

Art. 27(4): The packages constituting the diplomatic bag must bear visible external marks of their character and may contain only diplomatic documents or articles intended for official use.

Diplomatic pouches have been opened in the past when they contained, for example, mines, drugs, and even a person - and they weren't violations of the Convention, because they were no longer diplomatic pouches. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (1)

nbauman (624611) | about a month ago | (#47696939)

There must be a way to do it. Maybe they could appoint Assange a diplomatic courier.

Once they ship a big box, with a diplomatic seal on it, the host country can't open it. It's like a Fourth Amendment protection. So they could send a few big boxes through, see what the Brits do, and if they can get it through a few times, slip Assange in one of them. Like a shell game.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (1)

Theaetetus (590071) | about a month ago | (#47697049)

There must be a way to do it. Maybe they could appoint Assange a diplomatic courier.

Once they ship a big box, with a diplomatic seal on it, the host country can't open it. It's like a Fourth Amendment protection.

That's like saying the police can't search you without a warrant, because it's a fourth amendment violation. Sure they can, they just can't use anything they find against you in court. For example, if they search you and find a crack pipe and destroy it but never charge you with possession, you're going to have a really tough time alleging a violation of your civil rights without first admitting that you were carrying.

Similarly, the host country can open the diplomatic bag, find the drugs/weapons/person, and destroy them... leaving the sending country in the unenviable position of either letting it go, or claiming that their rights were violated regarding a diplomatic bag that itself violated the Convention. It's like those Russian tanks that Ukraine destroyed - sure, it was an act of war to blow them up... but it was an act of war for them to be in the Ukraine in the first place, so Russia sure isn't going to be the one to complain.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (1)

nbauman (624611) | about a month ago | (#47697133)

Do the British regularly search suspicious human-sized boxes coming out of the Venezuelan Embassy?

If the Venezuelans send these boxes regularly, and the British don't usually search them, then the Venezuelans could slip Assange into one of the boxes.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (1)

nbauman (624611) | about a month ago | (#47697165)

What would the Israeli Embassy have done if they had given Jonathan Pollard sanctuary in their Washington office? He showed up with the FBI hot on his tail, and he expected them to let him in, but they refused.

The Israeli Embassy was sending home crates of Pollard's secret papers. They could have slipped him into one of those crates.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (2)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 1 month ago | (#47696485)

The US has an exception to the rule that statesf: If a foreign diplomat is deemed a spy, fuck it. It goes back to the cold war era.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (1)

geekmux (1040042) | about 1 month ago | (#47696613)

The US has an exception to the rule that statesf: If a foreign diplomat is deemed a spy, fuck it. It goes back to the cold war era.

If a true "fuck it" mentality existed, he would have likely been ousted long ago.

It would also question the entire purpose of an embassy sitting in a foreign country. People that would have wanted him eliminated would have done so long ago without the burden of political correctness. "Fuck it" does not bother with manners.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (1)

bobbied (2522392) | about 1 month ago | (#47696549)

Assange is not a recognized diplomat and is subject to arrest. I'm sure the host country would be within their rights to arrest him if they saw him. He is really only protected when he is not on British soil (i.e. within the embassy).

Police have the right, diplomats or no, to stop and ID anybody on the public street. This includes the stopping of any vehicles out on the road. They may even detain diplomats, until their status can be fully validated. So, if they suspected Assange was intending to leave, saw the van leave, they could stop the van and detain him.

This is based on my understanding of USA law which I'm sure is similar to British law. Surely Police in the UK have the right to stop and require people to identify themselves, especially when in a car.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (1)

PPH (736903) | about 1 month ago | (#47696675)

The British will be looking for just such a trick.

Pardon me Mrs. Doubtfire. But you are blocking my view of that van in the embassy parking lot.

Re:Diplomatic pouch? (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696689)

You are aware that the U.S.A. had the Bolivian president plane downed in Vienna because they suspected Snowden on board?

Soon? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696445)

Given that he is no closer to getting Sweden to drop their charges, nor is it likely the UK will leave him alone, how on Earth can he leave soon?

Unless he has new dirt (wikileaks, remember) on either of them, such that the case gets dropped or the UK police suddenly develop extreme shortsightedness and, ahem, fail to spot him walking out of the embassy.

Re:Soon? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696497)

"how on Earth can he leave soon?"

I have it on good authority that it will involve a Russian diplomatic envoy under heavily armed military escort.

Putin is being too awesome for people to fuck with right now.

Re:Soon? (5, Interesting)

ledow (319597) | about 1 month ago | (#47696643)

Sweden could drop their charges today.

He still skipped bail from a UK court. And it's arguable he's currently resisting arrest.

Game over. You will be arrested and convicted if you leave.

The fact that people conflate "arrest" and "charges" into one is also annoying. You "arrest" someone in order to stop them leaving until you can ascertain whether "charges" are necessary and what charges are suitable (if someone is killed and you arrest someone else for murder, you can't then release them because it actually turned out to be manslaughter, or GBH, or a theft, on their part - they are under arrest until the charges are determined, if any). Sure, you need a reason . But "because an EU nation asked for your detainment" is good enough in the law, and skipping bail is definitely good enough.

So apart from skipping bail, resisting arrest, and everything else, the charges in Sweden mean little at this point. And the UK, whether you think they are in collusion or not, have the right to enforce their law on their soil (and, no, the embassy is NOT Ecuadorian soil, don't make that "old wives' tale" mistake).

Even if the UK couldn't care less about Sweden's demands, they went through the proper channels, offered appeals, it went to the Supreme Court and he ran away from UK bail. Game over. We HAVE to arrest you the second you try to leave or every Tom, Dick and Harry will follow suit thinking it's a "get out of jail free card" to just resist arrest and skip bail.

This is so silly (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696453)

So much fuss around a common sex scandal that happens every day in the UK and Hollywood and nobody cares...

Re:This is so silly (4, Interesting)

machineghost (622031) | about 1 month ago | (#47696479)

The people involved in common sex scandals aren't enemies of the most powerful state on Earth.

Re:This is so silly (1)

peragrin (659227) | about 1 month ago | (#47696591)

Sweden? I the most powerful state on earth? Wow.

Sweden is part of the EU. It has to abide by EU rules. Extradition to the USA is rarely done from EU countries.

Re:This is so silly (5, Informative)

machineghost (622031) | about 1 month ago | (#47696737)

You seem a little ignorant of recent history. Have you heard of America's rendition program? Have you heard of all the EU countries which participated? Here's a map to help:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/... [washingtonpost.com]

Re:This is so silly (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 1 month ago | (#47696709)

Come on now, Sweden isnt THAT powerful...

Re:This is so silly (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47697083)

I think you meant sex CRIME scandal. Fifteen years ago, the leader of the most powerful state on Earth was involved in a sex scandal.

Re:This is so silly (1)

Type44Q (1233630) | about a month ago | (#47697229)

Exactly. That's how you know this isn't about that silly, trumped-up bullshit in Sweden.

Shit, or ... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696455)

get off the pot Julian!

Eh. (4, Insightful)

Balinares (316703) | about 1 month ago | (#47696537)

I almost want to believe he's deliberately teasing the authorities into increasing the surveillance around the embassy, at a time when that ongoing expense is causing angry murmurs the general public. That would be pretty clever.

Re:Eh. (1)

rockabilly (468561) | about a month ago | (#47697033)

Indeed. I highly doubt they have the cops camping outside the building 24/7. I'm sure he could come and go as he pleases and no one would know.

Elvis has left the building! (1)

gunner_von_diamond (3461783) | about 1 month ago | (#47696543)

Well, not yet. Move along.

Look at this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696601)

***CODE***--h1-+URL 3 Content==h1-+==body-+==html-+***CODE***

Desperate to have a wank. (1)

pigsycyberbully (3450203) | about 1 month ago | (#47696655)

He cannot be arrested because there is no arrest warrant. The British, will probably hold him for questioning and then do the inevitable and release him. His solicitor, or in the U.S., that would be his lawyer, says the U.K. signed a international agreement not to extradite somebody who was not under arrest for a criminal offence, he is only wanted for questioning. Living in a room with diplomats for two years he must be absolutely desperate to have a wank.. Good luck Julian, wish you all the best salute! don't let the bastards grind you down. That is the human being of the future. Ready to die for freedom.

Re:Desperate to have a wank. (3, Informative)

Virtucon (127420) | about 1 month ago | (#47696893)

Actually he violated the terms of his bail in the UK. So he can be apprehended at any time. [telegraph.co.uk] He knew this as he fled into the Embassy. I agree with you though, he's probably tired of staring at the four walls every day and even RT is not giving him the airtime he used to get.

Re:Desperate to have a wank. (2)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | about a month ago | (#47697227)

Yep, prior to that, he wasn't in any legal trouble in the UK. They were going to ship him off to Sweden, because they'd received an extradition request that their courts had determined legal, but he was in no trouble there.

However, as soon as he fled to the embassy, he broke UK law. So now he's in trouble in the UK, if nothing else. Regardless of the validity of the allegation in Sweden, he broke UK law by fleeing the extradition.

Re:Desperate to have a wank. (0)

dhasenan (758719) | about a month ago | (#47696961)

More like choose a successor. The odds are good that he has raped someone, and even if he hasn't, it's not a good thing for Wikileaks that its public face has such a charge hanging over his head. Really, he should have stepped down a while ago. On the other hand, his position is probably one of the major things keeping him in that embassy -- he's tarnishing the reputation of Wikileaks to save himself a few years in prison in favor of those same years trapped in an embassy.

Re:Desperate to have a wank. (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47696965)

Julian didn't create his anonymous submission platform out of motivation to serve humanity. That was just his public-facing excuse. The real reason is much more mundane:

He likes to troll people in power.

The fact that the rest of us benefited from his trolling is awesome. The fact that he got himself in legal trouble is not so awesome.

Maybe the legal system has been manipulated such that America can wind up getting their hands on him, and sending him off for torture. Maybe that is the farce he promulgates to avoid having to answer for his own refusal to obey the law. I really don't have enough facts to know. I just know that I am thankful to him for exposing government evil, but I don't think that gives him a get-out-of-jail free card for completely unrelated charges. And I think he is an ass, so I only feel so much sympathy for him.

He's got a date? (1)

myth24601 (893486) | about 1 month ago | (#47696665)

Maybe he has a hot date and he needs to get to the pharmacy for some prescriptions?

UK likes to waste taxpayer money. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47696715)

It so typical in UK. Not my money, so let's employ hundreds of guards around Embassy.
Who cares in other parts of the country people wait 3-4 hours for somebody to show up after burglary or rape.
Corruption of politicians reached new heights.

Truth (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47696955)

>the British government would first need to revise its position and let him leave without arrest, something it has repeatedly refused to do.

And assuming they can take Obama's dick out of they're mouth for long enough.

idunno (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47697271)

he should have snuck out in a laundry cart a long time ago.. heh, maybe he already has

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>