Wikileaks founder Julian Assange arrested in London

[Sachinism]

The founder of the whistle-blowing website Wikileaks, Julian Assange, has been arrested by the Metropolitan Police. The 39-year-old Australian denies allegations he sexually assaulted two women in Sweden. Mr Assange is due to appear at City of Westminster Magistrates' Court later. A Wikileaks spokesman said Mr Assange's arrest was an attack on media freedom but it would not stop the release of more secret files. Scotland Yard said Mr Assange was arrested on a European arrest warrant by appointment at a London police station at 0930 GMT. Mr Assange is accused by the Swedish authorities of one count of rape, one of unlawful coercion and two counts of sexual molestation, alleged to have been committed in August 2010. If the district judge rules there is a prima facie case to be answered by Mr Assange, and the arrest warrant is legally correct, he could be extradited to Sweden. But the process could take months. Police contacted his lawyer, Mark Stephens, on Monday night after receiving an European arrest warrant from the Swedish authorities. An earlier warrant, issued last month, had not been filled in correctly. Mr Stephens said his client was keen to learn more about the allegations and anxious to clear his name. Continue reading the main story “Start Quote It's about time we got to the end of the day and we got some truth, justice and rule of law” End Quote Mark Stephens Julian Assange's lawyer He said: "It's about time we got to the end of the day and we got some truth, justice and rule of law. "Julian Assange has been the one in hot pursuit to vindicate himself to clear his good name." Mr Stephens said Mr Assange had been trying to meet the Swedish prosecutor in various ways to find out the details about the allegations he faces. Mr Assange has come in for criticism in the last week for the revelations made on Wikileaks. On Monday, Foreign Secretary William Hague criticised the website for publishing details of sensitive sites, including some in the UK, saying they could be targeted by terrorists. Former US vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin has described Mr Assange is "an anti-American operative with blood on his hands". Wikileaks was forced to switch to a Swiss host server after several US internet service providers refused to handle it. It has also come under cyber attack and several companies, including PayPal and Amazon, have refused to supply it. Mr Assange is expected to appear before a district judge at City of Westminster magistrates court before 1230 GMT, unless special permission is given for a later hearing. City of Westminster deals with most extradition cases but there are huge differences in the time it takes. Some cases, such as the extradition of computer hacker Gary McKinnon, have been going on for years because of legal challenges. But extradition can be extremely swift if the accused waives his legal rights. Mr Assange is an Australian citizen and his supporters have written an open letter to Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard asking her to protect him. One of the signatories, prominent barrister, Julian Burnside QC said: "First and foremost Julian Assange is an Australian citizen who is entitled to the protection of his country and does not deserve to be betrayed by his country. "Julia Gillard has been making it virtually impossible for Assange to return to Australia where he is entitled to be. And she has even threatened to cancel his passport. That is an outrageous stance to take." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11937110

[ViruRulez]

I am not sure but it looks like he might be framed.. 96% in TOI debate feels so :P .. hope he is not sent or extradited to US .. I like the exposing of the crooked Pakis and US by Assagne

[yoda]

I don't know why he can't be arrested for illegal possession of classified information.

[Clarke]

Now that he's arrested, when are his supporters coming out with the thermonuclear document ?

[veer]

in world politics, you gotta play dirty politics at times.. you cant be total transparent.. he should get arrested for what he did...

[Ram]

Most of the people here condemning the leaks probably know very little of the nature of the leaks or the term ‘confidential’. Just as an example, one of the major ‘leaks’ that have been roundly criticized is the list of installations/facilities all around the world that could potentially harm US national security interest if attacked by terrorists. The argument that has been put forward, mostly by people who know very little of what the list actually contains is ‘OMG, if the terrorists know these places, they could attack them..’. That is a baloney argument because most of these are actually information already available in the public domain. The list contains things like locations of Pharmaceutical facilities that produce flu/anti-anthrax drugs, gas pipelines etc.. You don’t need access to classified cables to find out where these things are. A basic google search will tell you what you need to know. The main reason why the Western governments don’t like the leaks is not because they might cause harm national security, but mostly because it exposes their hypocrisy on several issues. Nato for example just promosed co-operation with Russia on the missile shield, while silently planning a plan to protect the Baltic states from Russian aggression. This will come as a big blow to NATO-Russia ties, especially coming in the backdrop of the recent missile deal. Similarly, the leaks reveal that the Pakistani govt. secretly cooperated with the Indian intelligence agencies in the Mumbai attack investigation, even as it publicly maintained a belligerent stance on the issue. They also give us some fascinating insight into some of the most high-profile conflict centres of the world – North Korea, Pakistan, Iran. Could anyone else have imagined that the Chinese govt. was actually open to the idea of a unified Korean peninsula, under the control of the South Koreans? Would we have learnt that several Arab leaders encouraged attack on Iran over the nuclear issue? The leaks are a fresh insight into a world of information that the govts of the world DON’T want you to know and that’s for a good a reason – it exposes their hypocrisy, duplicity and dirty tactics. We should welcome exposures like this because it provides us a rare window of opportunity into a world that is generally barricaded from public sight. Instead, most of the people have bought into this idea that the ‘leaks’ are bad. Obviously, the mainstream media has a big role to play in this because they’re actively colluding in this as well. Imagine if a North Korean defector were to provide the CIA with sensitive and valuable information reg. that country’s nuclear program. He will be hailed as a whistle-blower and given asylum, complete with full state protection in some Western country. But if the tables are turned and someone exposes the hypocrisy of the West, he’s labeled a criminal and enemy of the state. Don’t trust what you read in the media people. In every story, there’s ALWAYS more than what meets the eye.

[Texy]

Oh Please! faulty rape charges with zero evidence.... America you can do better

[Texy]

His article just went live on The Australian newspaper site check it out: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/wikileaks/dont-shoot-messenger-for-revealing-uncomfortable-truths/story-fn775xjq-1225967241332

[Temujin Khaghan]

its seems he was having sex with a woman and she thought the condom broke and told him to stop. but he couldnt (can you?) and continued... so its rape!!! tbh i think the woman only got him hornier by asking him to stop...

[f.b.m]

Most of the people here condemning the leaks probably know very little of the nature of the leaks or the term ‘confidential’. Just as an example, one of the major ‘leaks’ that have been roundly criticized is the list of installations/facilities all around the world that could potentially harm US national security interest if attacked by terrorists. The argument that has been put forward, mostly by people who know very little of what the list actually contains is ‘OMG, if the terrorists know these places, they could attack them..’. That is a baloney argument because most of these are actually information already available in the public domain. The list contains things like locations of Pharmaceutical facilities that produce flu/anti-anthrax drugs, gas pipelines etc.. You don’t need access to classified cables to find out where these things are. A basic google search will tell you what you need to know. The main reason why the Western governments don’t like the leaks is not because they might cause harm national security, but mostly because it exposes their hypocrisy on several issues. Nato for example just promosed co-operation with Russia on the missile shield, while silently planning a plan to protect the Baltic states from Russian aggression. This will come as a big blow to NATO-Russia ties, especially coming in the backdrop of the recent missile deal. Similarly, the leaks reveal that the Pakistani govt. secretly cooperated with the Indian intelligence agencies in the Mumbai attack investigation, even as it publicly maintained a belligerent stance on the issue. They also give us some fascinating insight into some of the most high-profile conflict centres of the world – North Korea, Pakistan, Iran. Could anyone else have imagined that the Chinese govt. was actually open to the idea of a unified Korean peninsula, under the control of the South Koreans? Would we have learnt that several Arab leaders encouraged attack on Iran over the nuclear issue? The leaks are a fresh insight into a world of information that the govts of the world DON’T want you to know and that’s for a good a reason – it exposes their hypocrisy, duplicity and dirty tactics. We should welcome exposures like this because it provides us a rare window of opportunity into a world that is generally barricaded from public sight. Instead, most of the people have bought into this idea that the ‘leaks’ are bad. Obviously, the mainstream media has a big role to play in this because they’re actively colluding in this as well. Imagine if a North Korean defector were to provide the CIA with sensitive and valuable information reg. that country’s nuclear program. He will be hailed as a whistle-blower and given asylum, complete with full state protection in some Western country. But if the tables are turned and someone exposes the hypocrisy of the West, he’s labeled a criminal and enemy of the state. Don’t trust what you read in the media people. In every story, there’s ALWAYS more than what meets the eye.

Brilliant post. This is nothing but an convenient Orwellian clamp-down. I cant believe people actually agreed Hillary Clinton when she said that he was a threat to the 'international community', whatever that is. I think "Sex by Surprise" is the exact charge, which is exactly as ridiculous as it sounds to anyone who has had any.

[bharathh]

lol at the cartoon. A very accurate representation of the circus that is international diplomacy. Full marks to MM's post as well.

[Ram]

Probably the most pathetic aspect of the whole wikileaks episode has got nothing to do with the leaks at all, but concerns the Moose-hunting Mama Grizzly from Alaska, Sarah Palin. As with any important policy issues she prefers to use her Twitter account to give out statements, as opposed to say calling up a Reporter and speaking with them because you know, reporters are humans and humans have the tendency to ask questions…! Her tweet went such;

Inexplicable: I recently won in court to stop my book "America by Heart" from being leaked,but US Govt can't stop Wikileaks' treasonous act?

Leaving aside the fact that there are no facts in her tweet at all (Julian Assange is Australian and Wikileaks is based not in the US, so it does not qualify for a ‘treasonous act’), what is more shameful is that she used nearly 20 characters of her 140 character tweet quota to shamelessly promote her book. I find that to be a common recurring theme among Republican leaders. When that enemy of humanity and Master of darkness, Dick Cheney was going on a book tour in 2009 promoting his memoir, several journalists asked him questions about some transformational policy changes the Bush admn had effected, during their previous 8 years. But the Vice President would have none of it. The standard reply was ‘That’s why I wrote this book, you should read it..’ Same President Bush as well, when he was promoting his book earlier this year. These people are commenting or being asked to comment on some critical policy issues that permanently damaged or at least significantly changed the lives of millions of peoples and yet, they exploit that opportunity to unabashedly plug their memoirs. These guys are not statesmen, but salesmen. They would do ANYTHING, but absolutely ANYTHING, to advance their own selfish agendas, even if it involves a complete suspension of the conscious and common sense.

[yoda]

Nice. Cyber Goondas unite! Hackers target bank, credit card websites in WikiLeaks war. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Hackers-target-bank-credit-card-websites-in-WikiLeaks-war/articleshow/7066283.cms

[Sachinism]

As George Orwell said "Truth is treason in the empire of lies."

[Ram]

As George Orwell said "Truth is treason in the empire of lies."

Exactly. Thought lets get one thing clear. Julian Assange doesn’t represent ‘truth’ here, the leaks do. The other argument that is being bandied about frequently against these leaks is ‘Look, if these confidential cables come out, it could hurt international diplomacy..’. And to that I say, it isn’t Wikileaks’ problem that someone from the US called Karzai ‘a paranoid and weak individual unfamiliar with the basics of nation-building…." Or if Italian PM Berlusconi is called ‘feckless and vain..’. Its those diplomats problem.. Next time, maybe they consider stop sending these cables with such controversial statements about other leaders.

[Sachinism]

Someone put the cable leaks for sale on Amazon :haha: Paypal has released Wikileaks fund and I believe it was taken down for a while with DDoS attacks

[Clarke]

Exactly. Thought lets get one thing clear. Julian Assange doesn’t represent ‘truth’ here, the leaks do. The other argument that is being bandied about frequently against these leaks is ‘Look, if these confidential cables come out, it could hurt international diplomacy..’. And to that I say, it isn’t Wikileaks’ problem that someone from the US called Karzai ‘a paranoid and weak individual unfamiliar with the basics of nation-building…." Or if Italian PM Berlusconi is called ‘feckless and vain..’. Its those diplomats problem.. Next time, maybe they consider stop sending these cables with such controversial statements about other leaders.

Oh come on, you know very well that the world would be a much scarier/nastier place if every diplomat laid it out. I will agree that the cables expose the hypocrisy of powerful administrations and whether they represent a security threat is debatable but it isn't the fault of diplomats that they used certain means of communication which were supposed to be secure. How would this world be if every boss had full access to private communications between his employees ?

[Ram]

Oh come on, you know very well that the world would be a much scarier/nastier place if every diplomat laid it out. I will agree that the cables expose the hypocrisy of powerful administrations and whether they represent a security threat is debatable but it isn't the fault of diplomats that they used certain means of communication which were supposed to be secure. How would this world be if every boss had full access to private communications between his employees ?

You’re missing the point. It isn’t Wikileaks’ fault that such nasty things are said by people about other people. They published the material they got. It cannot be held accountable for a fault that it did not commit. If it hurts diplomacy, it a problem for Diplomats to handle, not for wikileaks to worry about. And your comparison with a boss having access to the private communication of his/her employees is completely off base I think. There's a difference between snooping and full disclosure. Wikileaks did not place wiretaps or illegally obtain this information. That is snooping. They published the data they got. While it may have some non-desirable consequences, it is an absolutely welcome development in the interest of full-disclosure.

[Clarke]

You’re missing the point. It isn’t Wikileaks’ fault that such nasty things are said by people about other people. They published the material they got. It cannot be held accountable for a fault that it did not commit. If it hurts diplomacy, it a problem for Diplomats to handle, not for wikileaks to worry about.

There has to be some sort of a nexus between the parties involved, those that illegally stole the information and the publishers. I'm not sure on the legal details but i reckon as long as you are holding something you are not allowed to, you could be in trouble.

And your comparison with a boss having access to the private communication of his/her employees is completely off base I think. There's a difference between snooping and full disclosure. Wikileaks did not place wiretaps or illegally obtain this information. That is snooping. They published the data they got. While it may have some non-desirable consequences, it is an absolutely welcome development in the interest of full-disclosure.

Let me try and get to an analogous scenario: can Youtube allow its users to upload movies the day they are released and state that they allow users to publish/host whatever they want on their channel with no legal consequences ? Or is this off base as well ? I reckon the cables are an asset of the US govt just like a movie is of a production company.

[Ram]

There has to be some sort of a nexus between the parties involved' date=' those that illegally stole the information and the publishers. I'm not sure on the legal details but i reckon as long as you are holding something you are not allowed to, you could be in trouble. [/quote'] The US espionage law has till now been used to prosecute US officials who leaked information to foreign govt or foreign spies who tried to obtain US classified information through improper means. Mr.Assange does not fall in either category. Neither is he a US citizen or an agent nor does have proven links to foreign govt. He did he operate from US soil. In order to prosecute him, at least in the US, they have to prove that a)Mr.Assange knew beforehand that the leaks could potentially harm US national security or b) He had an hand in the improper obtaining of the information (eg, He hacked into a US military n/w or paid within the army to get obtain the info for him etc..). Both of them is almost close to impossible to prove, especially the latter. If say they tried to show evidence in the court that Mr.Assange actively solicited the cables from say an US army field marshal, that US field marshal has to be first prosecuted for treason, because he was the one who was did the ‘leaking’ Consider it this way – If it was possible to nail him using existing anti-espionage laws, they would have already done so. It is for the precise reason that the entire Wikileaks’ modus operandi operates in this grey area of uncertainty that they’re trying to pin him down using jinned up (probably) sex-abuse charges.

Let me try and get to an analogous scenario: can Youtube allow its users to upload movies the day they are released and state that they allow users to publish/host whatever they want on their channel with no legal consequences ? Or is this off base as well ? I reckon the cables are an asset of the US govt just like a movie is of a production company.

The laws and legality dealing with copyrighted and classified information are completely different. The US govt. could potentially try to take down wikileaks from US based server through a court-order, but there’s nothing they can do about if the site is hosted from a foreign server, as it is done now.