SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Sweden's highest court has thrown out Julian Assange's appeal against his arrest warrant where he is wanted for questioning. Prosecutor Marianne Ny changed her mind earlier about questioning Assange in London. Assange has repeatedly requested that the questioning take place over the phone or in London as per common practice, to avoid traveling to Sweden where he fears he risks extradition to the US. Sweden has also repeatedly refused to give assurances regarding possible extradition.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Assange Appeal Rejected by Sweden's Supreme Court
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 56 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
You can't have your cake and let your neighbor eat it too.
-- Ayn Rand
(Score: 2) by lentilla on Tuesday May 12 2015, @10:05PM
You make some very compelling arguments.
He is incarcerated anyhow, just on his own accord.
Quite true. I suppose the significant difference is that his incarceration is also on his own terms (or at least his choice from amongst the options available to him). You are quite correct about his lack of effectiveness, though. In the grand scheme of things I'm not sure that's such a bad thing since; just like an old soldier; there comes a time when we have to put down our sword and leave the fight to others. Ignoring for a second whether his actions were right or wrong, at least he fought hard for something he believed in and perhaps that can be considered sufficient.
Without the trial he allows the opponent to pour dirt on him.
Absolutely. I'm not saying that I disagree with you, but I would point out a few issues with the "go to trial" option. First of all, as you so eloquently put:
a common criminal who hides from the police in bushes
can be seen from two sides of the fence. On one side we see Mr Assange hiding in a cowardly fashion. On the other side though we must ask ourselves: from who is he hiding? That's why I invoked Kafka in my original post. He can not know from who he hides - he can not see the enemy. From this particular side of the fence: is it not those who seek to destroy him that are the ones hiding in the bushes? He's in a horrible position. If he comes out into the open, those lurking in the bushes will come out, one by one, each taking a shot at him until he is no more. That's the nasty part about this business - it's not a clean fight where two gentlemen square up. There is no honour in this business - none at all. So how can we talk of honour, of "maning up", when the honour would be only one sided?
is he a hero who proudly goes to the gallows[?]
And I submit to you that this would be entirely futile. Not without merit; I hasten to add; but still ultimately futile.
He could try to expose the corrupt court when he defends himself.
(Emphasis is mine.) He will be forever shadow-boxing because he will never get a clear look at his foe.
I'm not saying that I disagree with you. I try to put myself in his position and I can't say what I would do. Like you said, the roles of hero and coward "are not compatible". You make a strong argument for finishing the fight for reasons of honour but I do wonder if that would be an empty act. Even if he wins, he loses - and we know that the only way forward in those cases is not to play at all.
The law does not cope very well with fuzzy situations. At least when somebody murders another person it is crystal clear who is the guilty party. Assange's actions are not so clear cut - not by any stretch of the imagination. So what will necessarily happen is that the law will twist and turn, grappling with its own apparatus, and the only one who stands to lose anything personally is the one lone human at the centre of the maelstrom.
On reflection; if it were me; I'd probably leave the Embassy, although I am glad I need only to imagine this, sitting here comfortably in front of my computer. If there must be a fight, best be at it directly. I doubt there will be any winners - I don't think it's possible - simply because there is no clarity over right and wrong in these situations. I imagine it akin to going to the gallows for a crime you didn't commit, hearing the baying of the crowd and the feeling of complete helplessness and injustice, and just wanting to protest your innocence. But the noose tightens around your neck never the less. It must be a truly bitter pill to swallow.
(Score: 1) by tftp on Tuesday May 12 2015, @11:06PM
So how can we talk of honour, of "maning up", when the honour would be only one sided?
Honor is one-sided since death of King Arthur :-( The Schwartzkopf Doctrine [wikipedia.org] spells it out quite clearly - attack with overwhelming force.
You are absolutely correct, of course, that opponents of Mr. Assange are TLA types that will not be speaking on the witness stand. But that's the cards that were dealt to Assange. And, honestly, what would *you* expect if you make it your business to leak secrets of governments who, basically, own this little planet? Assange should be happy that he was not beaten to death by a few unidentified drunks. I do not quite understand why; someone is protecting him from physical harm, I guess.
Even if he wins, he loses - and we know that the only way forward in those cases is not to play at all.
Indeed. I don't play these spy games; and you probably don't do that either. But he did - and he is paying for it. The TLA types are snickering in background how they managed to arrest him without even going to trial :-) They scared the guy into self-arresting. Now Assange has a problem. If he stays in the embassy, that's the end of him - literally. If he leaves, it means that he lost years of his life for nothing. Breaking the bail would be still a heavy burden upon him - he should not have done that. That's why fathers always tell their sons: "Be a man, don't run, face the danger..." However the brave Sir Julian ran, ran away. This act alone makes him a suspect in the eyes of the crowd.
It's probably not too late for him to prepare for his defense and come out and face the music. This is the best solution, IMO, unless he likes to live like a hermit. Also, he needs money to live - who is feeding and clothing him? I don't think it's the embassy. What is the source of that money, and how soon will it dry up?
(Score: 2) by lentilla on Tuesday May 12 2015, @11:26PM
I don't play these spy games; and you probably don't do that either.
Well, not today. My handler has given me the day off. :-)