Daniel Halliday
Apr 13 · Last update 5 mo. ago.

Now that Assange has been removed from the Ecuadorian embassy should he be extradited to the US?

Following nearly 7 years seeking refuge in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, Julian Assange was arrested on the 11th April 2019. As the founder of wikileaks.org he is wanted by the US government in connection with a massive internet dump of secret United States documents leaked by Chelsea Manning in 2010, and the US are seeking his extradition. The Swedish authorities previously issued an international arrest warrant in relation to sexual assault allegations also, but Assange maintained that the Swedish charges were a smear campaign and would lead to an extradition to the US; this directly led him to see refuge in the Ecuadorian Embassy in 2012. Julian Assange was arrested by UK authorities for failing to surrender to court, where, why and how should Assange now be prosecuted?
Stats of Viewpoints
Why not prosecute the much larger war crimes that Assange helped expose?
0 agrees
0 disagrees
Breaking of international law
0 agrees
0 disagrees
No, Sweden would be the only valid extradition
0 agrees
0 disagrees
Yes, Assange needs to stand trial
0 agrees
0 disagrees
No, any extradition will be a dark day for journalism
0 agrees
0 disagrees
Viewpoints
Add New Viewpoint

Why not prosecute the much larger war crimes that Assange helped expose?

What are Assanges crimes in comparison to the ones that he revealed? He revealed things that everyone wanted to know about, felt they deserved to know about, and that were crimes of much greater gravity than his own (disputed crimes) in the public interest. In a similar way to Edward Snowden this seems more like a message to the general public, not to make public information that makes the government or any structure in it, look bad, and the US want that message to be international. The very values of justice and democracy are being undermined here, instead of wanting to find out the truth or achieve justice the military focused government of the US are prepared to lie to the people in order to perpetuate their own interests, and when such lies are revealed they react by imprisoning, punishing, lying about or torturing those who reveal them. Why not prosecute these much worse and more heavily guarded crimes before prosecuting Assange’s disputed, much less violent, less disgusting and less corrupt crimes...

youtu.be/rY5jCvRHEFk?t=11763

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
May 14
Created

Breaking of international law

Prolonged solitary confinement of over 15 days constitutes torture according to the UN, something that the US have done to Chelsea Manning, in addition to humiliation tactics that are also a direct violation of US law. Mike Pompeo has stated his intention to designate Assange and Wikileaks as a non-state hostile intelligence service, meaning upon Assange’s extradition the United States could switch his charges to something much more serious, or seek further charges than the current conspiracy to commit computer intrusion. Furthermore it is forbidden to turn someone over to a country if he/she is likely to be the victim of torture according to UN Convention Against Torture, which the US and UK has ratified. Turning Assange over to the US in light of Pompeo's intentions and Manning's treatment would be in direct contradiction to this norm of international law and represents a serious violation of a number of Assange's human rights.

youtube.com/watch?v=Yu8KQ7ceN9w

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
May 14
Created

No, Sweden would be the only valid extradition

The only valid extradition that the UK government should allow should be a Swedish extradition, for questioning in relation to the original charges held against Julian Assange in 2012. Even UK Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn has commented that Assange should not be extradited for exposing atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan. If Assange is guilty for publishing this information why aren’t the other media organisations that printed the same information also? Assange is clearly being made a scapegoat here. The UK and Sweden should be doing everything in their power to stand up for Assange’s human rights and to prevent his extradition to the Unites States, but his open cases in Sweden should be resolved and justice be bought to Assange or his victims.

bbc.com/news/uk-47904837

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Apr 25
Created

Yes, Assange needs to stand trial

No one is above the law; he may have committed a series of quite serious crimes and should be held accountable for this. He is possibly a criminal who has led to Donald Trump in the White House, helped terrorists internationally, and even possibly committed rape in Sweden, he needs to stand trial, for his criminality to be determined and justice be served. Assange has maintained that his rights and liberty has suffered as a result of the last 7 years, but he could have walked out to face what he is accused of at any time. It is hypocritical that he has claimed that he has suffered due to his conditions while seeking refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy considering the number of lives he continues to risk by leaking such sensitive information.

youtube.com/watch?v=ynR9mpn6g4A youtube.com/watch?v=Uw9jiA4po3k

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Apr 20
Created

No, any extradition will be a dark day for journalism

Assange provided a safe space online for whistle-blowers to leak information for the greater public interest, and has published an abundance of embarrassing documents that implicate various governments and individuals in scandals, corruption and crimes across the globe. This is in fact all his extradition is based, his part in exposing US war crimes, something Chelsea Manning has already been prosecuted for. Likewise this is even what was behind the revoking of Asylum at the Ecuadorian Embassy, with the Ecuadorian President also implicated in a corruption scandal really. Any extradition would be an unprecedented case, where someone is prosecuted for publishing leaked documents, something that would be seen as a standard journalistic practice if it involved less damning evidence against a less powerful regime.

youtube.com/watch?v=6HJq0WxoK0c

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Apr 17
Created
Translate