[Winstonm]

From Salon,

Quote

Indeed, almost every person with whom I've spoken who has or had anything to do with WikiLeaks expresses one fear above all others: the possibility that they will end up in American custody and subjected to its lawless War on Terror "justice system." Americans still like to think of themselves as "leaders of the free world," but in the eyes of many, it's exactly the "free world" to which American policies are so antithetical and threatening.

What do you think? Hyperbole or something more?

[kenberg]

It certainly is one of my big fears. I can hardly sleep at night from my worry at being caught up in the U.S. justice system. Well I recall the horror of my mistreatment being hauled off to court when I was a mere 17 for really doing nothing, nothing at all. Well, not much anyway. Well, maybe a little. Well, maybe I was being a total jerk. But really, taking me downtown and all. Terrible.

[Winstonm]

I don't know, Ken. Julian Assange's lawyers have used the potential of being turned over to the U.S. for possible torture as a reason for England to forbid extradition back to Sweden.

If the U.S. did get its hands on Assange, would you consider him held as a political prisoner or real criminal threat?

[kenberg]

The argument from the lawyers: Lawyers are supposed to vigorously defend their clients. The fact that they make this argument does not mean that they regard the argument as solid, it only means that they think the argument might convince some judge. OJ walked, don't blame his lawyers, they did their job.

How would I regard him? Maybe as a total jerk (see previous reply reminiscing about my 17 year old self). But that's not illegal, if it were many of us would be in jail. I would not at all favor any "out of channel" methods or whatever one might call them, no termination with extreme prejudice as the old term went. I don't know what the laws are, I don't know if he violated them. My 17 year old self caused a ruckus and damaged some property. I was being a total jerk but the arrest was for specific actions in violation of specific laws. So it should be here, if laws were broken. The international aspect of this complicates things of course. More work for lawyers.

I won't be contributing to his defense fund. Some people achieve folk hero status. Emiliano Zapata, Hurricane Carter, Lenny Bruce (well, maybe not, but I once had a lawyer who wore a hands off Lenny Bruce button). Julian Assange seems like an unlikely candidate.

[Winstonm]

It is interesting to me how all this is causing such a furor in many areas of the world and in many political/journalistic circles yet it is so completely ignored by mainstream Americans.

Maybe it's because subconsciously America has voted off Assange and Wikileaks from its Idol programming.

To paraphrase T.S. Eliot: This is the way the republic ends: Not with a bang but with a whimper.

[kenberg]

I don't want to hang you with your analogy but it really doesn't work. On American Idol, as I understand it, people ask to be on, they perform, and they ask for our approval. Mr. Assange is more akin to someone walking in from the street, grabbing the stage, putting on his show and announcing that no one had better complain or they will be sorry they did.

I haven't voted Mr. Assange onto an island or off of an island. I don't expect his help with any problems I have, I am sure he doesn't expect my help with any of his. The man is on his own, choosing his path. He apparently is an idol of yours, he isn't one of mine, I seriously doubt he gives a hoot one way or the other what either of us think of him. And I am sure he was not expecting a medal from the government for his actions. He has his technical experts and his lawyers to take care of him, that's enough.

[mgoetze]

kenberg, on 2011-January-16, 05:20, said:

I don't know what the laws are, I don't know if he violated them.

And as I've said before, it certainly doesn't matter whether he did because he wasn't in the USA. If the USA wants to try and earn any respect from me they had better start accepting the concept of "jurisdiction" and how it applies to them as well as everyone else.

Yes, the American justice system can be pretty terrifying for foreigners. One hears about people who want to visit the US having their laptops and other valuables seized and then being sent back home. Guantanamo is certainly a mockery of justice. CIA operatives kidnapping people in Europe and putting them in special prisons...

Some of these things are true. Others might not be. But all in all, the USA certainly work hard on keeping their international reputation low.

[kenberg]

Jurisdiction is definitely important but it is another thing that I don't know much about.
Hypothetical: Suppose that I, sitting in Maryland, use the internet to transfer funds to a German citizen in Germany with instructions to kill another German citizen in Germany. I am guessing, but I really don't know, that if I were later to be in Germany I could be arrested and tried in a German court. I definitely think that should be the case, I have no idea if it is.

I'm sure that Mr. Assange has a very capable legal team that will explain why his actions are not subject to U.S. law. Quite possibly this is correct. If so, he skates. If not, we prosecute.

Yesterday I went to the gym in the morning, played some bridge in the afternoon, and visited friends in the evening to celebrate our 16th anniversary and their 22nd. I did not need to consult any lawyers, nor really do I ever. So my knowledge of law is spotty at best. I am fine with everyone concerned in this case just following the law, whatever that may be.

[Winstonm]

Quote

He apparently is an idol of yours, he isn't one of mine

I am afraid I have given the wrong impression, then. It is not the man that has me intrigued but the attacks on journalistic freedom his plight symbolizes.

Wikileaks accepts unsolicited information from whistleblowers, and they do it in a fashion were they cannot know the sources of information.

The information gathered by Wikileaks is then distributed to participating partner newspapers who edit, redact, and publish the accouts - Wikileaks only publishes sensitive and secreit material what has already been released, edited, and redacted by these newspapers. I don't know all the papers, but two partners are The New York Times and The Guardian - and it seems it is finally beginning to dawn on the NYT that the assault on Wikileaks' journalistic ability to release information may some time be applied to them, as well.

The description of Wkikleaks' action is the description of investigative journalism itself, not criminal behavior. I just find it odd that the criminalization of this organization's leader by accusation and innuendo is so readily accepted as justified.

[blackshoe]

I don't see anything of "investigation" in your description of what wikileaks does, Winston. Rather it appears they take "information" from unknown sources, make no attempt to verify it, and pass it on to newspapers, hoping, I suppose, that the newspapers will take the steps necessary to ensure that what's disclosed should be disclosed.

[Cyberyeti]

There is a general fear of being extradited to the US in the UK.

The problem is that the US has decided that lots of things (often with no connection whatsoever to the US and not an offence where the "crime" has been committed, check out the british bankers or Gary McKinnon for example) can be prosecuted there, and that America is then using draconian extradition legislation which we were promised when the bill was passed in parliament would only be used for terrorism suspects.

There is also a fear of being financially ruined whether you win your case or not.

Assange certainly fears being executed or sent to Guantanamo if he ends up in the US, and the EU won't extradite if the risk of execution exists, so there are certainly going to need to be some assurances on that.

[kenberg]

"certainly fears being executed"?
You are taking him at his word for this? I can't say that I have spent a lot of time analyzing Mr. Assange but I haven't thought of him as a particularly fearful type. If a signed statement from the U.S. saying that we will neither send him to Guantanamo nor seek the death penalty would satisfy objections to his extradition, I would guess that could be worked out.

I am quite willing to believe that he does not wish to be extradited, but let's not just believe without question everything a guy says about how he fears execution. We may be a little nuts here but we still haven't elected Sarah Palin as president.


I don't want to downplay concerns about U.S. overreach. Going through security one time I had a small allen wrench confiscated. I hadn't realized it was there and I thought that the security guy got a little nuts about it. I used the wrench on the pedals of my bicycle so you can guess the size of it and its potential as a weapon. I hope serious concerns from those who might wish to visit will be taken seriously but all this fear of Mr. Assange about being executed strikes me as a convenient pose.

[blackshoe]

Just about anything is a potential weapon. How good a weapon is another question.

That said, TSA does tend to err on the side of caution, sometimes to a ridiculous extent.

[kenberg]

blackshoe, on 2011-January-17, 08:30, said:

Just about anything is a potential weapon. How good a weapon is another question.

That said, TSA does tend to err on the side of caution, sometimes to a ridiculous extent.

Sure. I didn't quarrel with the guy. It was a few years ago and I said "Ok, Mr. Bush can have my allen wrench". Bad attempt at humor. I then had to listen to him explain just what does happen to all of the confiscated items and how really the allen wrench would not be given to Mr. Bush. This time I had the good sense to shut up until he was done.

But anyway, back to Mr. Assange. I take him to be an intelligent guy who chose a course of action that he knew would put him in serious conflict with the U.S. government. I imagine he prepared for it and decided that the game was worth the trouble. Perhaps he is an idealist, perhaps he just likes the action. I don't know. I see no reason why this should be treated other than as a matter of law.

A few years back, here in Maryland, a young man killed another young man. Before he was arrested, his father put him on a plane to Israel where, being Jewish, he could claim citizenship and defy extradition. Not good, but nothing could be done. In another case that I forget the details of, a Norwegian man married to a U.S. woman took their son and moved to Norway. The woman found that she had no legal recourse at all. Again, not good, nothing could be done. Hopefully things can be worked out in the Assange case. The basis should be in law and in international agreements. We may or may not like the results, but that's the way to go.

As to investigative reporting, that can often be a tough call. There was an article in the Post the other day discussing the Kennedy-Nixon race of 1960. Apparently there was some damaging info in someone's office and the Kennedys learned of it. A break-in occurred, unsolved, and the information went to reporters. The information was accurate, it was damaging to Nixon, it came from a break-in. Maybe the Watergate guys should have claimed they were doing investigative reporting.

In another instance, I was listening to an NPR show about Jack Anderson and Richard Nixon. Apparently they were both taking pay-offs from the same guy.

Most claims from most high-profile characters about their motives in any political drama should be taken with a ton of salt. That definitely includes Australian idealists.

[blackshoe]

kenberg, on 2011-January-17, 09:15, said:

I see no reason why this should be treated other than as a matter of law.

Can't disagree with that, nor with your "ton of salt" comment.

[Cyberyeti]

kenberg, on 2011-January-17, 07:52, said:

"certainly fears being executed"?
You are taking him at his word for this? I can't say that I have spent a lot of time analyzing Mr. Assange but I haven't thought of him as a particularly fearful type. If a signed statement from the U.S. saying that we will neither send him to Guantanamo nor seek the death penalty would satisfy objections to his extradition, I would guess that could be worked out.

I am quite willing to believe that he does not wish to be extradited, but let's not just believe without question everything a guy says about how he fears execution. We may be a little nuts here but we still haven't elected Sarah Palin as president.

This was from his lawyer, and in the context of trusting the British legal system to sort this out but not the Swedish one. It was actually to try to avoid Britain extraditing him to Sweden on in his words "politically motivated rape charges".

He reckoned the British system would properly test in court his claim that the US extradition request when it came was political, but the Swedish one wouldn't and would just hand him straight over.

[kenberg]

Mr. Assange has various reasons for wishing to avoid extradition to Sweden. Saying "I fear that I will be extradited from Sweden to the U.S. and they will send me to Guantanamo" probably has bettr prospects than "I fear that I might be convicted of rape in Sweden". He is entitled to a hearing where his fears are assessed. I would be very opposed to using phony rape charges in Sweden as a trick to get him to the U.S. I would also be equally opposed to letting a person avoid legitimate rape charges by claiming he fears that Sweden is just a ploy. I have no reason to believe that Sweden would be interested in such a role.


Having a hearing to sort it out is fine by me. I make no prediction about the outcome.

[mgoetze]

blackshoe, on 2011-January-17, 00:16, said:

I don't see anything of "investigation" in your description of what wikileaks does, Winston. Rather it appears they take "information" from unknown sources, make no attempt to verify it, [...]

It appears to me that the way Wikileaks appears to you is the result of only a cursory glance.

[blackshoe]

Yeah, well, when I get my "investigative reporter" license, I'll look into it more. Maybe I can find a "deep throat" to leak info about wikileaks to me.

[Cyberyeti]

kenberg, on 2011-January-17, 15:33, said:

Mr. Assange has various reasons for wishing to avoid extradition to Sweden. Saying "I fear that I will be extradited from Sweden to the U.S. and they will send me to Guantanamo" probably has bettr prospects than "I fear that I might be convicted of rape in Sweden". He is entitled to a hearing where his fears are assessed. I would be very opposed to using phony rape charges in Sweden as a trick to get him to the U.S. I would also be equally opposed to letting a person avoid legitimate rape charges by claiming he fears that Sweden is just a ploy. I have no reason to believe that Sweden would be interested in such a role.


Having a hearing to sort it out is fine by me. I make no prediction about the outcome.

Well when the Swedish justice system dropped the rape charges and some time later a politician told them to reopen them, I think he has every right to fear political interference in Sweden.