Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Assange Extradition- Britain Agrees to Extradite Publisher to Country that Plotted to Assassinate Him (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter ren hoek
- Start date
sho nuff
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
ren hoek
Footballguy
ren hoek
Footballguy
On this, yes. They try to make it sound like Assange is a stuttering pothead living on someone’s couch who just won’t get a job. They barely make mention of the fact he’s been living in isolation for 7 months, in violation of Ecuador’s own Constitution and multiple UN rulings. They say he took refuge in the embassy to avoid the Sweden investigation, which is disingenuous, and doesn’t make sense anyway given that it was dropped a long time ago. The asylum grant was based on legitimate concerns about being extradited to the US for leaking classified documents. Disgraceful.
msommer
Footballguy
So, not only was "journalist" hyperbole in the original post, "torture" was too. Good to know. How's the cat, btw? Being treated better now?
msommer
Footballguy
His "solitary confinement" - being in the embassy - is self inflicted. And do keep the personal insults to yourself
Last edited by a moderator:
Dedfin
Footballguy
I haven't followed this situation closely at all. I don't understand why this living situation has reached the point where it has. I know he had some charges he was avoiding and went to the Ecuadorean embassy and has been there since? Surely Ecuador should have made a decision on his living arrangements before now. Letting a guy just live at your consulate or whatever for that long seems irresponsible. What am I missing here?
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Oh. The extradition that not only hasn’t happened, there’s no evidence I’m aware of that a request exists. And the UK had him in its jails but let him go on bail (which he skipped out on) but now is planning on unjustly incarcerating him? Which will naturally lead to being tortured.
Don'tren hoek said:
msommer
Footballguy
Exactly. He is apparently staying in the embassy (and has been for the past few years) to ensure the British are not going to incarcerate him for skipping bail. Not sure what the punishment is for that in the UK, also considering that the charge has since been withdrawn.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I'm pretty sure the longest I'd be willing to stay in the Ecuadorian Embassy in order to avoid a year in a British jail is about nine months.
ren hoek
Footballguy
The reason Assange sought political asylum was because he had good reason to believe he would be extradited to the US for the Iraq/Afghan leaks. //
PRESS RELEASE - STRATFOR EMAILS: US HAS ISSUED SEALED INDICTMENT AGAINST JULIAN ASSANGE
Tuesday 28th February 2012 18:30 GMT
Confidential emails obtained from the US private intelligence firm Stratfor show that the United States Government has had a secret indictment against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange for more than 12 months.
Fred Burton, Stratfor's Vice-President for Counterterrorism and Corporate Security, is a former Deputy Chief of the Department of State's (DoS) counterterrorism division for the Diplomatic Security Service (DSS).
In early 2011, Burton revealed in internal Stratfor correspondence that a secret Grand Jury had already issued a sealed indictment for Assange: "Not for Pub -- We have a sealed indictment on Assange. Pls protect." (375123) According to Burton: "Assange is going to make a nice bride in prison. Screw the terrorist. He'll be eating cat food forever." (1056988) A few weeks earlier, following Julian Assange's release from a London jail, where he had been remanded as a result of a Swedish prosecutor's arrest warrant, Fred Burton told SkyNews: "extradition to the US is] more and more likely". [(373862).
Emails from Fred Burton reveal that the US Government employs the same counterterrorism strategy against Julian Assange and WikiLeaks as against Al Qaeda: "Take down the money. Go after his infrastructure. The tools we are using to nail and de-construct Wiki are the same tools used to dismantle and track aQ Al Qaeda]. Thank Cheney & 43 [former US President George W. Bush]. Big Brother owns his liberal terrorist ####." [(1067796)
Ten days after the CIA reportedly assassinated Osama bin Laden, Burton writes in an email sent to Stratfor's "Secure" mailing list that he "can get access to the materials seized from the OBL Osama bin Laden] safe house." [(1660854)
Burton states: "Ferreting out Julian Assange's] confederates is also key. Find out what other disgruntled rogues inside the tent or outside [sic]. Pile on. Move him from country to country to face various charges for the next 25 years. But, seize everything he and his family own, to include every person linked to Wiki." [(1056763)
Along with the FBI, the Diplomatic Security Service and the Department of Defense (DoD) form a multi-agency US Government outfit seeking to criminally indict and prosecute WikiLeaks and Julian Assange. According to the Department of State, the DSS handles the investigation of all leads that involve the DoS and assists the DoD in forensic analysis of hard drives seized by the US Government in its ongoing criminal investigation.
Burton also says he "would pursue c]onspiracy and [p]olitical [t]errorism charges and declassify the death of a source someone which [he] could link to Wiki" [(1074383). Burton's strategy is to: "b]ankrupt the arsehole first," Burton states, "ruin his life. Give him 7-12 yrs for conspiracy." [(1057220)
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said: "For over a year now, the US Attorney General Eric Holder has been conducting a "secret" Grand Jury investigation into WikiLeaks. This neo-McCarthyist witch hunt against WikiLeaks may be Mr Holder's defining legacy. Any student of American history knows that secret justice is no justice at all. Justice must be seen to be done. Legitimate authority arises out of the informed consent of the governed, not Eric Holder's press secretary. Secret Grand Juries with secret indictments are apparently Eric Holder's preferred method of dealing with publishers who hold his administration to account. Eric Holder has betrayed the legacy of Madison and Jefferson. He should drop the case or resign. Should he continue, however, the Obama administration may not -- Democrats and Republicans alike believe in the right to tell the truth."
As early as June 2010, after the release of the Collateral Murder video but prior to the Afghan War Diaries release, the emails talk of a sealed indictment. In an email conversation between Shane Harris, a National Security journalist, and Burton, Harris is surprised that Assange was reporteded to be attending a Las Vegas Investigative Reporters and Editors (IRE) conference. Burton remarks: "As a foreign national, we could revoke Julian Assange's] travel status and deport. Could also be taken into custody as a material witness. We COULD have a sealed indictment and lock him up. Depends upon how far along the military case is" [(391504). Julian Assange cancelled his appearance at the IRE conference due to security concerns.
In another email to Stephen Feldhaus, Stratfor legal counsel, about Ronald Kessler, a "pro-FBI journalist", Burton remarks: “I look forward to Manning and Assange facing a bajillion-thousand counts of espionage]." [(1035283)
In July 2010 alleged WikiLeaks source Bradley Manning was moved from Camp Arifjan, Kuwait to the Quantico Brig in the Military District of Washington at the request of Maj. Gen. Terry Wolff, then Commanding General of the 1st Armored Division/US Division – Center in Iraq.
Wolff requested Manning's move, the Pentagon reported, "due to a potentially lengthy pre-trial confinement because of the complexity of the charges and an ongoing investigation.” Three days before Manning arrived at Quantico Brig, Burton wrote to George Friedman, Stratfor CEO and founder:
“We probably asked the ASIS Australian Secret Intelligence Service] to monitor Wiki coms and email, after the soldier from Potomac was nabbed. So, it's reasonable to assume we probably already know who has done it. The delay could be figuring out how to declassify and use the Aussie intel on Wiki... The owner [Julian Assange] is a peacenik. He needs his head dunked in a full toilet bowl at Gitmo.” [(402168) //
This has been ongoing ever since.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
That’s funny, the documents WL links to as sources for reference are turning up null.
- Btw this is an example of a WL blog which I have mentioned before. People read this, treat it as actual documentation, and run with it. Often, almost always IMO, the documents don’t say what WL says they say. Here the source documents don’t even exist at all.
Last edited by a moderator:
ren hoek
Footballguy
https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/375123_fw-ct-assange-manning-link-not-key-to-wikileaks-case-.html
https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/37/375123_fw-ct-assange-manning-link-not-key-to-wikileaks-case-.html
Guessing they reorganized the site somehow and never went back to update the links from this 2012 release. All of the source material is still there.
https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/37/375123_fw-ct-assange-manning-link-not-key-to-wikileaks-case-.html
Guessing they reorganized the site somehow and never went back to update the links from this 2012 release. All of the source material is still there.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
The second link just cites an NBC report stating that Holder was considering filing charges. First of all you don’t need a stolen email for that. Second, did he or not?
Last edited by a moderator:
msommer
Footballguy
I'd say that the behaviour of Assange since then indicates that he at least believes formly it exists (or could be filed at any moment).
Why would anyone else break bail and exile themselves in an embassy for six years?
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I assume these source documents are available on the web? This being Wikileaks and all?
Edit: Ah, I see. Thanks.
Last edited by a moderator:
ren hoek
Footballguy
A couple things. Some in here were under the impression there wasn’t an indictment, this contradicts that. Second, the linked article only suggests charges were being considered, not the existence of a sealed indictment, so we wouldn’t have known that without the email.
ren hoek
Footballguy
There’s also the extremely draconian rhetoric by Pompeo (hostile intel service), Sessions (prosecuting a priority), Bolton (“target practice”), negotiations btw Pence and Moreno that seem to coincide with further isolation/abandonment of Assange, Lehtinen’s letter to turn over Assange, house Dems letter arguing for turnover of Assange (before letter requesting closed testimony), Schiff only willing to interview Assange when in custody, $500m IMF loan and Ecuadorean relations seemingly contingent on kicking Assange out of embassy, UK spending millions on security detail/surveillance, refusal to confirm with Assange legal team whether such an extradition order exists.
It doesn’t take much imagination to see what’s happening here.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
That Assange truly fears this makes sense intuitively. I'm questioning the use of the specific WL links here to make the point.msommer said:
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Ren, they're just privately talking about publicly available information. Here:ren hoek said:
WikiLeaks founder could be charged under Espionage Act
- They're not talking inside supersecret baseball here, that was public domain reporting, it still is (albeit from 2010). You avoid MSM, yet refer to secret communiques which are just talking about MSM reporting.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I want to remind you that blogging rights are an issue everywhere, just look at EFF.
I think you and a lot of JA/WL supporters are making something of a mistake here. I don't think it's necessary to make the claim he is a publisher or journalist. Why is that distinction important to you? IMO the same rights adhere even if he is not truly press, a journalist or a publisher.
If advocates for JA do this they are setting him up for a trap I think because many governments or courts use just that distinction to deny bloggers protections. But it really shouldn't matter, it's a free speech issue.
You'd think the Committee to Protect Journalists - a great organization - telling you this should tell you something. He's not a professional journalist. His need for a maid and conjugal visits from Pam Anderson is not on their list of priorities considering real professional journalists are being persecuted and murdered across the world, such as Kashoggi as a recent example. But instead of supporting journalism WL has actually published stolen private emails of journalists. I wouldn't be surprised at how they've reacted to the purveyor of hot data crowing about his lack of toiletries.
But again, this is a trap. WL's rights are not dependent on their status as journalists, so don't go begging for their respect knowing you won't get it in the first place.
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford
Footballguy
These emails are consistent with there being an actual sealed indictment. They're certainly potential evidence of such an indictment, and at the very least impeachment evidence if the authors claim they never believed that such a thing existed. It may exist - certainly it's more likely with these than without, but I'm not sure it rises to the level of contradiction given the number of possible explanations for what was meant. Still, it's a decent reason to believe Assange may be right about an indictment.
They do, however, contradict the idea of him being brought in to be tortured (given that they're talking about placing him in prison, not a blacksite.)
msommer
Footballguy
I respectfully disagree and think there is a lot ofren hoek said:
in this "great conspiracy against Assange"Mostly that there are too many people involved. You know the adage, three can keep a secret if two of them are dead. Here we've got quite a few more.
I don't doubt that Assange could face jail time if he is extradicted to the US. And since you and I differ on whether he is a journalist there lies the issueon whether that is or should be a problem for anyone other than Assange.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Let's be clear, we've seen one email, one where the writers (still not sure who these guys are but getting past that) - based on reports from AP, NBC, CBS and other MSM like the WaPo I posted - believed there is a sealed indictment. You, I, Ren or anyone in the public arena could reach the same conclusion. But anyway this speculation is interesting:
Ooohhkay then. Can't we surmise this ourselves from WaPo reports? Yes it's interesting people on this level are reaching that conclusion and have since 2010. The DNC hacks via Russia seems in the same vein and the same mode of operation.This is proving too much.
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I agree it's taking it way to far, but that doesn't mean it's useless as evidence of an indictment. As I said, it isn't by any means dispositive, but it's worth putting in the binder labeled "is there or isn't there an indictment."Let's be clear, we've seen one email. one where the writers (still not sure these guys are but getting past that) - based on reports from AP, NBC, CBS and other MSM like the WaPo I posted - believed there is a sealed indictment. You, I, Ren or anyone in the public arena could reach the same conclusion. But anyway this speculation is interesting:
This is proving too much.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Just a point here - I think the events supporting a supposed indictment we've discussed so far would include Manning, which you noted above, and Russia. However this particular comment by Pompeo was about the Vault7 release. The DOJ has a prosecution on that already and they're adding charges. This one is an active prosecution.ren hoek said:
The email posted above is from 2011 talking about reports from 2010. The Manning case I think would be hurt by Obama pardoning the culprit himself, Manning. And as we know at this very moment Mueller has not shown his hand publicly. He hasn't prosecuted anyone yet for the actual hacking - though he seems to have everything lined up I haven't seen anything suggesting a sealed indictment. I don't know if the Snowden case is something that can result in Assange being indicted?
And the Swedish charge has been dropped from the passing of time.
What does Manning have before him besides that? The bail jumping charge, which he should legitimately face.
Really it seems to me this thing can't get better, it will only get worse. As such he has a window of opportunity to make his case in court in the UK right now. Face the bail charge, draw out anything else the US has on him and fight it on the ground.
Last edited by a moderator:
msommer
Footballguy
Well, the food (that he now pays for himself I believe) might be a lot better at the embassy than what he would get in her Majesty's clink. Doubt they'll let him out on bail again...
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Ha, of course, I'm sure the empanadas are excellent. And maybe schwarma from the down the street. But how long would he face for jumping bail? A month? Maybe a fine? And on the flip side what's the risk of being evicted and maybe even having his citizenship stripped once a US indictment is made public?
msommer
Footballguy
Henry looked it up upthread. Up to 12 months depending on circumstances.
While Correa was president there probably was no risk of being evicted ever. Moreno is a different guy, though, even being from the same party and former VP in Correa's government. Not sure about Ecuadorean politics, that country was always just bananas to me (pun intended)
Last edited by a moderator:
msommer
Footballguy
Not "we" as such....Didn’t WL DM don Jr asking him to tell his father to question the election results? And we’re still pretending they’re some neutral party without an agenda?
Last edited by a moderator:
ren hoek
Footballguy
Saints, it’s not just about the existence of an indictment. It’s the tone and line of thinking being applied to Assange. You don’t glean the idea of Assange being tossed in Gitmo, sexually assaulted by other prisoners and dunked in human excrement by the sanitized language of a wapo article. You don’t get the life and death consequence of the situation when they turn it into a punchline about his cat.
The article you link still requires the reader to speculate, it’s not the same thing. You can debate whether publishing the emails is right or wrong or illegal or in the public interest, but they do provide unique insight rarely seen in traditional reporting.
ren hoek
Footballguy
Who’s pretending that? Where has anyone said anything like that?Didn’t WL DM don Jr asking him to tell his father to question the election results? And we’re still pretending they’re some neutral party without an agenda?
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
You've shown one email indicating two people talking about published news reports. Can we see the email (the one that works) under no. 402168? That's the source of the claim about Gitmo.
"Maj. Gen. Terry Wolff, then Commanding General of the 1st Armored Division/US Division – Center in Iraq" apparently seems to think that one of his soldiers was killed as a result of Manning and Assange's actions, and he wants Assange put in Gitmo, and you think that's a revelation?
On the one hand I find this the most unsurprising, unrevealing thing ever. On the other apparently the US commanding general truly thinks their actions resulted in the death of a solider. If this were true I kind of see where he is coming from. - It has absolutely nothing to do with practical realities though. Manning himself never landed in Guantanamo, I see no reason Assange would.
Last edited by a moderator:
msommer
Footballguy
Guantanamo I believe is for enemy combatants so Manning would (and was) not applicable.
Is (the head of) a "hostile intelligence service" an enemy combatant? That would seem a stretch.
In addition, Imagine the signal it would send to argue in High Court for extradiction only to fly the extradicted person directly to Gitmo. Has that ever happened?
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Ren hasn’t provided the source email (I’m guessing he hasn’t even looked at it) but I’d imagine this general genuinely believed an American soldier had been killed as a result of Manning and Assange. That’s a point against Assange in and of itself because it seems like a pretty specific soldier he had in mind.
But yeah I guess the general viewed it as aiding the enemy and thus he wanted him thrown in Gitmo. But no there’s no way that could ever happen. That would be a basis for charging Assange under one of the mishandling of classified information or espionage crimes where it must be shown that the lives of military personnel had been endangered, but that doesn’t land someone in Gitmo.
And no, the US doesn’t do extradition on false bases only to spirit the subjects into Gitmo. That could result in the whole treaty being breached and in any event possibly no UK court would ever comply with a request again. Heck the US has no basis to put Assange in Gitmo under their own laws anyway, it wouldn’t even survive a US court challenge.
Last edited by a moderator:
ren hoek
Footballguy
Just enter a search string into the search function. It's not hard. You are talking about one (perhaps multiple) soldiers compared to an illegitimate war that killed hundreds of thousands of civilians, thousands more troops, and set off a chain of events that brought ruin to the Middle East. That's not Assange's fault. And I think the "associated forces" language of the 2012 NDAA could be applied to Assange as an enemy combatant.
ren hoek
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
But you haven't even read this email you're making your claim on, right? Is that fair?
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Here's a root email. The former Deputy COS at DSS, per WL, and I guess that's basic enough, is Burton. A field doctor, Taufener, sends him a list of casualty incidents from The Guardian. - Note - PUBLIC RECORD. - Burton says "I would hope" that the FBI indicts WL. He's just speaking off the cuff here, from a Guardian news report. Further up he talks about his daughter's soccer practice.
In another email, someone else at StratFor links to a Mother Jones article - Note, again - PUBLIC RECORD. - Burton says "its reasonable to assume" the USG already knows who it was doing the leaking.
These are people talking about news reports that you and I could read. They are speculating like you and I would, though obviously having much better knowledge of real life details.
The former chief of staff at DSS has absolutely no power to send someone to Guantanamo. This is a guy who is angry that one of his comrades has been murdered apparently as a result of leaked classified intelligence, for the very reason such laws exist.
There is nothing in this email suggesting or supporting that Assange could be sent to Guantanamo in any way.
Last edited by a moderator:
msommer
Footballguy
Did you know that Ted Bundy's mother defended him until the day she died?
Clearly what Assange has done (or is being exposed to there in his embassy apartment) pales in comparison to what Bundy did or experienced during his ten years in actual prison, including death row.
Still, one has to have sympathy for the mother. She didn't choose to skip bail and flee into the Ecuadorian embassy six years ago.
ren hoek
Footballguy
The media's refusal to defend the Wikileaks publisher is a betrayal of press freedom.
Crucifying Julian Assange
Crucifying Julian Assange
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
WikiLeaks admitted it’s a non-state intelligence service
- I just think it's interesting that that's how Assange views it, not as publisher/journalist.
- I just think it's interesting that that's how Assange views it, not as publisher/journalist.
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
[scooter]
Footballguy
Is it possible that Assange has access to something that would incriminate or embarrass Trump? Would he release it to save himself from being indicted?
Last edited by a moderator: