The reason I think gov'ts should be expected to play by the rules is that they need to set an example. When the power that a gov't or any leader possesses is from the trust placed upon them by the people that they are supposed to represent, anything that erodes that trust subsequently erodes their right to wield that power.

That being said, it seems to me that so far all the rules are indeed being followed. Painfully so. That's why this whole thing is taking so long and people are exploring every tactic and loophole that they can think of to accomplish their interests. All sides are doing this. And you can bet that every player in some way has something that they feel they can gain from the stance that they're taking. An unprecedented can of worms has been opened here. In any case, I'm sure, that this Australian gentleman will inevitably be a prisoner in one way or another the remainder of his life and he knows it.

According to the (non-american-owned) reporting here, he's only wanted for questioning (not trial) over "rape". And that it's not even "rape" as in "forced sex acts", but a weird Swedish law that allows adult consensual-sex to be deemed inappropriate after the fact (such as having sex with a minor - it's not ok even when consensual) -- where the prosecutor has decided that the women's consent at the time was obtained through "inappropriate seduction" and that because it was a short-term relationship, they should have used a condom, therefore it is "rape".

Do you have a source for details of the specific allegations against Assange? There seems to be a lot of conflicting information floating about.

[quote name='FLeBlanc' timestamp='1345126563' post='4970180']
[quote name='Shippou' timestamp='1345125421' post='4970170']
... though I never bother paying attention to political drama any more.

This is actually kind of a big part of the problem, right here. I don't know the truth regarding Assange one way or the other, but the thing is, from where I sit it seems as if we are letting certain people act with impunity and do whatever the hell they want, simply because we as a nation can't be arsed to pay attention, give issues the proper impartial coverage they require, or hold those certain people accountable for their actions. We, simply, don't give a shit, and giving a shit is the only way that the rules of due process and the preservation of civil rights and liberties will be fairly observed by those in power.

Please, people, start giving a shit.
[/quote]

Name something that can be done, that actually WORKS .

Voting? - Nope, both parties don't care about anything but power
Protest? - Waste of time
Blogging? - No one cares about blogs any more
Talking About It ? - Waste of air
Communicating To Politicians? - ha Ha Ha Ha Ha


So I reaffirm my stance of not caring about political drama any more.
[/quote]

3 of those items seemed to work really well with Egypt, luckily they didn't carry the same attitude you harbor.

And in regards to the situation with Julian Assange, of course some of the documents he leaked could of led to unwanted tensions between countries, but if they weren't doing anything wrong in the first place it wouldn't of been an issue. I dont think this is something I or any other civilians of the said nations should be okay with allowing! this is just the start of things to come, once someone starts pushing the envelope they are going to keep doing so to see how far they can push it, and people having a defeatist attitude of "I cant do anything about it" is exactly what is going to give them the power to abuse our rights and the laws.

sooo... let me get this straight. Sweden issues an international arrest warrant because of a crime that the police here in sweden usually wouldn't even bother to even start an investigation on.. and this causes Britain to threaten to violate the Vienna convention, to catch this this guy so he can be brought to Sweden for questioning. All for this investigation that already has been closed down once and lacks evidence, and has a high chance of being closed down again...

Nope, nothing fishy going on here....
</Irony>

...and people having a defeatist attitude of "I cant do anything about it" is exactly what is going to give them the power to abuse our rights and the laws.

^ This ...is almost exactly what I was going to write

It is true that every human institution since, well... forever, has been afflicted by some form of corruption. Organizations will war, they will send secret forces to do the deeds they don't want anyone to know about, they will lie and cheat and steal.. Corporations do the same. Corruption runs all the way down, even to the intimate, interpersonal relationships in our day to day lives. This is a fact of human nature. But, that does not mean we have to just roll over and accept it. Yes, it is difficult to bring the kind of reform that is needed, and yes every effort of ours is, ultimately, doomed to failure. But the moment we stop trying to be better, the moment we just roll over and let our governments and our institutions do what they do unchallenged and unchecked, is the moment that we lose. Idealism might not be realistic, but it is the only driving force we have to stand counter to the things we perceive to be wrong, the injustices that occur every day. Yeah, maybe you'll be a single voice drowned out in a chorus, but that doesn't mean you should just shut up and not say anything.

If there is solid evidence of wrongdoing against Assange, then of course there needs to be justice. But if, as seems to be apparent, the whole noise and tumult is merely about trumped up charges meant to bring Assange into the grasp of people bent not on justice, but on revenge for airing their dirty laundry, then this is wrong, and Ecuador is to be applauded for standing up for the guy. But it really is not surprising that, in the climate of fear and intimidation that darken today's world, he would be unwilling to deliver himself into the hands of people who wish him ill and have the political clout to bring him to harm.

Now, I do have friends and family currently serving in the US military, and I do understand that leaks on the scale of what occurred do have repercussions that can affect even the lives of those friends and family. That bothers me, a lot. But what also bothers me is that deception and intimidation are relied upon so heavily in this matter, rather than reasonable due process. It's the misinformation that bothers me the most; how difficult it is to get the straight facts, not just about this story, but about so many others. So many lies, so much hatred, so many people following their particular personal interests, rather than remembering things such as simple human compassion. But the only way real change will ever be effected, is if those changes occur first at the lowest levels, at the level of people dealing with people. It certainly won't be effected if you just say, "gosh, politics is just so darn political. Everyone is a liar, nobody is honest, so I'll just ignore it and let them be what they are." The only thing that lies down that road is more and more of the same kind of madness that we already have.

The whole situation reeks to me. My thoughts:

• I have no idea about the rape case, although the things I've heard don't sound rock solid.
  
• It seems like too much governmental effort is being expended following one case.
  
• It would seem logical for the governments concerned to take one of the many possible compromises (e.g. an agreement not to extradite further or to video interview) rather than stretch international relations and internation law.
  
• Given that Assange is not a US citizen, other countries should not be hastening him to the US for treason charges.
  
• I strongly doubt the US would treat Assange humanely and fairly if they got him.
  
• Corruption seems sadly unavoidable, which is why resisting it is essential. An unopposed force will overwhelm.
  
• We should watch governments like a hawk... in the same sense that you would watch an ex-burglar if they are working in your house.
  

sooo... let me get this straight. Sweden issues an international arrest warrant because of a crime that the police here in sweden usually wouldn't even bother to even start an investigation on.. and this causes Britain to threaten to violate the Vienna convention, to catch this this guy so he can be brought to Sweden for questioning. All for this investigation that already has been closed down once and lacks evidence, and has a high chance of being closed down again...

That's not what happened. Sweden issued an arrest warrant. They withdrew the arrest warrant pending further investigation and allowed him to leave. After leaving to the UK another investigator issued a request for further questioning and it was granted. As he had fled, they issued an international warrant for his arrest. He didn't want to leave the UK to be questioned, so they filed to have him extradited, which he appealed multiple times leading to where we are now.

Honestly, there is no reason for him to be seeking asylum from being extradited from Sweden. If he were afraid of being extradited to the US, he should have fled to a country that doesn't extradite to the US, but he's in the UK, which could extradite him just as easily as Sweden could, and since he's not a citizen they probably would if asked.

He did not 'flee' he was given permission to leave the country after a request for being able to live there was turned down - they could have prevented him leaving the country at that time too if he was a suspect yet they did not. They allowed him to leave the country.

UK->US extradion isn't as easy as it might seem; a case like it, a UK citizen who was charged with hacking the US defense system, has been stalled in the courts here for 8 years. While he is not a UK citizen the fact he is a commonwealth one might complicate matters. (IANAL and all that)

Sweden, on the other hand, has a setup which allows them to effectively give the US tempory custody of a prision without the courts getting involved as it is an excutive decision. (The UK would still have to OK it apprently but chances are if he is over there then it wouldn't do anything to stop it).
As to how likely this would be, well apprently Sweden has in the recent past violated international treaties in relation to surrendering foreign nationals into US custody and has been critised by Amnesty International and the UN Committee against Torture for giving up two refugees to the CIA who were then tortured under the Egyptian regime of Hosni Mubarak.

That's not what happened. Sweden issued an arrest warrant. They withdrew the arrest warrant pending further investigation and allowed him to leave. After leaving to the UK another investigator issued a request for further questioning and it was granted. As he had fled, they issued an international warrant for his arrest. He didn't want to leave the UK to be questioned, so they filed to have him extradited, which he appealed multiple times leading to where we are now.

Yeah, Okay. But as Phantom said: He didn't flee. He was given permission to leave. My point is still that there's many things that's weird about this. Julian Assange obviously does not trust the swedish legal system, then why not question him in the UK instead? For some reason it is very important that he's brought here (to Sweden) for questioning, eventhough criminals has been questioned in other countries before...

Right now so called 'experts' are writing in swedish media saying that 'He should come to Sweden for questioning. The whole investigation will be thrown in the trashcan anyway because there is not enough evidence'. If that is the case, then I wonder why there is so much effort being put into this? The extent of the crime simply doesn't warrant this amount of attention...