Julian Assange extradition judge refuses request for delay | Hacker News Reader

Julian Assange extradition judge refuses request for delay

theguardian.com

66 pointseth0up23 comments

Just think: if he'd not tried to flee rape allegations in Sweden, he'd be free (or at least in a much more favourable situation) right now. Despite all the crap he said, being extradited to Sweden would have made extradition to the US less likely: two legal systems would need to approve (Sweden and UK), not just the UK.

Sweden is not stronger than the U.S:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition#Sweden

And they'd get Sweden (at risk of egregious violation of EU law) instead of the UK (steadfast US ally, in NATO, Iraq War) to do this, why?

UK courts are fiercely independent and wouldn't be swayed by domestic or international pressure. There's zero chance the UK govt will prevent his extradition but he has a reasonably good chance the courts will stop it on human rights grounds, it does appear to be a political extradition.

Why do you think the UK would have had to agree once he was in Swedish custody?

That's just how extradition law works: you're on loan, not given over forever, and in particular in the EU, you can't use a European Arrest Warrant just to grab someone so you can extradite them outside the EU without asking the origin state's permission, unless you're seriously implying he'd be black-bagged.

> in particular in the EU

Then add Brexit to this mix and stir.

>Despite all the crap he said, being extradited to Sweden would have made extradition to the US less likely

He was called crazy for stating that it was a ruse to get him into the hands of the US. Given that A) he had access to better legal advice than is generally dispensed by random strangers on the internet and B) the part about the US trying to snare him in spite of multiple denials ended up being 100% true I'm inclined to believe that he was probably on the mark.

and C) https://www.hrw.org/news/2006/11/09/sweden-violated-torture-...

>He was called crazy for stating that it was a ruse to get him into the hands of the US.

And he was crazy. Fleeing to the UK, America's staunches ally with a long history of cooperation with US law enforcement, especially in cases of extradition, in order to avoid possible extradition in Sweden is simply not sane.

Even taking the assumptions you're working with, that the Sweden charges were a ruse to allow Assange to be extradited, the argument fails because Assange fled this supposed conspiracy to a jurisdiction that is 100% guaranteed to cooperate in extraditing him to the US.

>he had access to better legal advice than is generally dispensed by random strangers on the internet

Considering the predicament his apparently genius legal counsel's advice put him in over the last decade, I'd say that's not a given at all. It seems much more like he's acting out of panic and desperation rather than some carefully-crafted legal strategy.

He fled to the Ecuadorian embassy in the UK. Big difference.

If the US was going to fabricate allegations against him, why in Sweden and not in the UK?

>>... and warned of a bleak future for journalists publishing “truthful information” contrary to US interests.

I wonder if that wasn't always the case.

I don't want to live in a world were "journalists" just dump any sensitive information they get their hands out with complete disregard for what harms it can cause, and doing nothing to actually vet the information beforehand.

If that's a "bleak future" then let it be.

Yeah, we need a master to vet and gate the information before it is released to the public, right?

The Guardian, WP and NYT did just fine with Snowden's material.

So I guess in your mind it would also be perfectly fine if someone tool all your data including your passwords and released it to the public, right?

Re filters: How would you know? Maybe you dont want to know?

https://i.imgur.com/VUdcIou.jpg

If you really believe that three different papers actively hit crucial information, then there's not much I can say that would convince you otherwise honestly.

What if you just didnt check? It's the rule, not the exception that these orginizations are filters. Access to original sources breaks their hold on deciding what is real.

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3599 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/10052 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/50332 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/32795

Skippy's email is worth reading.

You can't handle the truth!

40 points 10 comments 1 hour and not on the front page.

Nothing to see here folks.

Of course he does

Reply on news.ycombinator.com