"Extradition shall not be granted if the offense for which extradition is requested is a political offense."<p>If an American journalist in UK is publishing Chinese military secrets, he will not be extradited to China.<p>If an Australian journalist in UK is publishing American military secrets, will he be extradited to America?<p>This is the question now...
There is a double standard. I doubt that the wife of the US diplomat will ever be extradited to the UK after killing a UK citizens. [1]<p>[1] <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-usa-crash-parents/do-the-right-thing-family-of-uk-teen-killed-in-crash-tells-u-s-diplomats-wife-idUSKBN1WT26R" rel="nofollow">https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-usa-crash-parents...</a>
"The charge against Julian is very specific; conspiring with Chelsea Manning to publish the Iraq War logs, the Afghanistan war logs and the State Department cables. The charges are nothing to do with Sweden, nothing to do with sex, and nothing to do with the 2016 US election"<p>I'd like to call out the popular and prolific users of hacker news who previously were all about Sweden, sex and election interference and who are very silent now.
In 50 years, people will look in disgust and utter disbelief at our treatment of Assange.<p>Or maybe this is too optimistic. Maybe our grandsons will indeed understand us. They will understand us too well, and be ashamed of us.
Funny to read through the comments going back and forth on definitions of journalism and the details of extradition treaties.<p>Did you not read the article? The convoluted legal language and system are used to explain away the reality that there are no rules really.<p>If you mess with powerful interests you are in trouble. No legislation or rights or specifics make the slightest difference at all. It's uncomfortable, but that's reality.
>Baraitser then capped it all by saying the February hearing will be held, not at the comparatively open and accessible Westminster Magistrates Court where we were, but at Belmarsh Magistrates Court, the grim high security facility used for preliminary legal processing of terrorists, attached to the maximum security prison where Assange is being held. There are only six seats for the public in even the largest court at Belmarsh, and the object is plainly to evade public scrutiny and make sure that Baraitser is not exposed in pulic again again to a genuine account of her proceedings, like this one you are reading. I will probably be unable to get in to the substantive hearing at Belmarsh.<p>Its perverse
Following the WikiLeaks story from its early days until today leave me incredibly demoralized and to be frank, angry. If I where to list the amount of injustices WikiLeaks and those who have associated with them have suffered, I would sit here all night, and I strongly suspect that is by intelligent design.<p>This story, if the end of it is as it seems, it will mark a shift in the perceived ideals of the "free world".
This exposes the sham that is western "democracy". Everything is allowed to persecute those who oppose the status quo. The so called freedom they claim for themselves when they attack Russia, China or Venezuela in the corporate media is a right reserved for those who have money and who submit to the ruling class.
An injustice commited to one is a threat made to all. This is deffinitely a stain and an open bleeding wound on western powers history and supposed values/principles, this wound will only tend to grow. Sadly it's one those events with a dimension so large that it can go unnoticed because of how big it is, it is an Omen. Julian Assange is the first nonviolent, information activist made a political enemy targeted and persecuted in global scale. He's already being imprisioned and tortured for years without a fair trial and with his human rights denied. God bless him!
I think it is important to look at this with the lens of objectivity:<p>Accusations that Assange is actively being not just harassed but outright tortured to the point where he "might not survive the proceedings" in jail...<p>... to claims that "members of the US Government" were there and "controlling procedures"<p>and claims that the judge had been instructed what to say:<p>> possibly she had not properly memorised what Lewis had been instructing her to agree with<p>Apropos of anything else:<p>> Baraitser took her cue from Lewis and stated categorically that the date for the extradition hearing, 25 February, could not be changed.<p>> Lewis received his American instructions and agreed that the defence might have two months to prepare their evidence (they had said they needed an absolute minimum of three) but the February hearing date may not be moved.<p>As far as I can tell the hearing date is over four months away.<p>These are all very large claims and should be considered within the spectrum of someone who is as equally friendly towards Assange as he claims the state is against him.
How is it possible there is not yet a huge mob gathering near the court and threatening to burn everything. Because, this is literally revolting. How many people support that? And how many people are disgusted by that? Would nobody regret doing nothing?
Bear in mind that with Lauri Love, while the case was lost in 2016 and a judge ruled that he could be extradited, it then went to the high court and was overturned two years later.
This doesn't bode well for any inkling Snowden may have of returning to the US in a timeframe that doesn't include some kind of revolutionary change of government.
Can someone explain to me why there is apparently no footage of this? Aren't court hearings supposed to be public or was filming simply not allowed?
I know no one wants to hear this but Assange wouldn't be in the mess if he had conducted his operation more intelligently. Others have done similar actions and faced no repercussion. This is the fault of Assange's hubris and lack of attention. I used to be a huge Assange and Wikileaks supporter but I haven't been for quite some time. He/they made serious but entirely avoidable mistakes.<p>Edit: Fwiw I support whistleblowers and government transparency and the end to rampant unconstitutional surveillance overreach but I simply couldn't support Assange after finding that he crossed a known ethical line with the inducement and material support. And Chelsea Manning should've never went to jail. Shes the true whistleblower in all of this. And Adrian Lamo and Assange are the ones that made serious yet avoidable mistakes. He simply should've acted as a carrier/news organization but he/they didn't do that. That and the support from Russia and eagerness to influence the election at all costs while maintaining impartiality is laughable. Maybe Assange could've been a force for good if he hadn't taken sides.
But is it possible that actually the judge is prepared to deny the extradition, and cannot say anything just yet because of the secret duty? If she thinks all of that is torture for Assange, maybe she is right to want it to end as soon as possible, especially if she already has taken her decision.
This is an atrocious, heinous crime being committed in front of all of us, and we <i>should</i> be rioting in the streets. This can happen to <i>any of us now</i> - nobody is safe from torture by the state.<p>This is the end of civilized society in the West, people.<p>Where Julian Assange goes, so go we.
It's possible Assange hasn't been sleeping enough for <i>years</i> due to the stress of his situation. The effects of that might resemble those of torture and debilitating drugs.<p>Just something to consider...
Holy crap, HN mods you should edit this title and make it more sensational, like the most posts on HN. I feel this post is not receiving the attention it deserves