Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Julian Assange Seeks Asylum In Ecuador Embassy

ecuadorembassyuk.org.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 114 posts

Re: Julian Assange Seeks Asylum In Ecuador Embassy

#31

Post by [deleted] »

Muzza wrote: post #15
hack_edu wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US imprisonment has very little to do with this. The man faces rape and sexual assault charges, one of the most serious offenses a person can commit. Though I back his politics 100% and consider him a hero to be remembered, he has every responsibility to face his accusers in a fair trial. Shame on Sweden if they hand him over to the Americans after his trial has concluded.

> Though I back his politics 100%, he has every responsibility to face his accusers in a fair trial. With Sweden's looney toons laws, I strongly disagree.

[deleted]

Re: Julian Assange Seeks Asylum In Ecuador Embassy

#32

Post by opminion »

dsrguru wrote: post #24
opminion wrote: post #2

Assange interviewed the Ecuatorian president for his program at RT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lE-1-9QXd3Y The Ecuatorian president is introduced as "populist", yet the interview is non-critical. I thought "populist" was globally pejorative? Edit: the president himself uses the term in a negative context

I live in the U.S., and I've never heard "populist" used pejoratively. Where are you from and what does it connote when used pejoratively in your country?

Europe. It usually means when one tries to grab votes at the cost of doing what's "correct" from one's point of view. A stereotypical case would be providing "bread and circus" in the short term while the country is sinking in the mid term.

The following headlines are example use of "populist" with negative connotations (they are not the only ones, I just provide anecdotal evidence of the common use of "populist" as a negative trait).

British English:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17837098

http://news.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/hi/house_of_lords/newsid... (beware starts parliamentary video automatically)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/23/punitive...

French:

http://www.lemonde.fr/idees/ensemble/2012/02/09/le-populisme...

Spanish:

http://www.abc.es/20120515/opinion/abcp-populista-eres-20120...

Re: Julian Assange Seeks Asylum In Ecuador Embassy

#33

Post by crazygringo »

ForrestN wrote: post #6
opminion wrote: post #2

Assange interviewed the Ecuatorian president for his program at RT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lE-1-9QXd3Y The Ecuatorian president is introduced as "populist", yet the interview is non-critical. I thought "populist" was globally pejorative? Edit: the president himself uses the term in a negative context

"Populist" is generally either neutral or positive in American politics. But most often I hear it used to describe a political strategy, going directly for the masses instead of the upper echelons of power.

I would disagree, and say it's usually negative -- the idea that you win short-term approval for a dubious policy by appealing to the masses who are ignorant of the true consequences, as opposed to appealing to the elites who would presumably understand that the thing's a bad idea.

For example, promising to cut the gasoline tax would be a very populist tactic -- people think "I pay less for gas, that's great!", whereas elites would think, "we'll have less money for infrastructure, leading to decline, or else we'll have to raise taxes elsewhere, making non-drivers subsidize drivers."

And by calling this tactic populist, you would generally be indicating that it appeals to the electorate's ignorance. Most people consider that a bad thing, since it leads to worse outcomes. Hence, populism is a pejorative term. I'm referring to use of the word in the US only.

If you want a positive term, you would describe something as "democratic" instead.

(I'm an American from New York who follows politics a lot.)

Re: Julian Assange Seeks Asylum In Ecuador Embassy

#34

Post by AngrySkillzz »

hack_edu wrote: post #11
pvnick wrote: post #5

How dire is Assange's situation? Is it really possible that the US will try to imprison or even execute him? Edit: I know were not talking directly about the US here, but the reason I made the jump is that I see Sweden as a lot more likely to allow the US to bully it into giving up Assange

US imprisonment has very little to do with this. The man faces rape and sexual assault charges, one of the most serious offenses a person can commit. Though I back his politics 100% and consider him a hero to be remembered, he has every responsibility to face his accusers in a fair trial. Shame on Sweden if they hand him over to the Americans after his trial has concluded.

The reason the US is commonly brought into this is because of misunderstanding of the circumstances and general suspicion.

First off, sexual assault and rape laws are very different in Sweden, and the crimes he has allegedly committed wouldn't be translated as assault or rape in most countries. Though that doesn't necessarily mean he didn't do something bad to someone that requires legal recourse; what currently stands are accusations of crime under Sweden's legal code.

More importantly, suspicion arises because the Swedish prosecutor's office initially withdrew the rape charge and warrant for Assange's arrest, and weeks later the charge was brought back. Some time after that, a European arrest warrant was issued. Some are suspicious that this was due to pressure from the US government, as they would like to see Assange in prison, but I'm not going to give my opinion.

Also, Assange has yet to be charged. I'm not sure how this works in Sweden, but it seems in this case that they don't want to charge Assange until after a second round of questioning. That is what the extradition is for.

Re: Julian Assange Seeks Asylum In Ecuador Embassy

#35

Post by mc32 »

objclxt wrote: post #26
mc32 wrote: post #14

Why not Argentina? He could take advantage of their antipathy toward the UK. Too transparent?

It's not the UK that wants him - it's Sweden.

I understand, but it's the UK who are allowing the extradition, which, he, Assange, clearly disagrees with.

Re: Julian Assange Seeks Asylum In Ecuador Embassy

#36

Post by Confusion »

dsrguru wrote: post #24
opminion wrote: post #2

Assange interviewed the Ecuatorian president for his program at RT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lE-1-9QXd3Y The Ecuatorian president is introduced as "populist", yet the interview is non-critical. I thought "populist" was globally pejorative? Edit: the president himself uses the term in a negative context

I live in the U.S., and I've never heard "populist" used pejoratively. Where are you from and what does it connote when used pejoratively in your country?

In Europe, 'populist' is basically the lowbrow version of 'demagogue'.

Re: Julian Assange Seeks Asylum In Ecuador Embassy

#37

Post by wvenable »

AngrySkillzz wrote: post #34
hack_edu wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US imprisonment has very little to do with this. The man faces rape and sexual assault charges, one of the most serious offenses a person can commit. Though I back his politics 100% and consider him a hero to be remembered, he has every responsibility to face his accusers in a fair trial. Shame on Sweden if they hand him over to the Americans after his trial has concluded.

The reason the US is commonly brought into this is because of misunderstanding of the circumstances and general suspicion. First off, sexual assault and rape laws are very different in Sweden, and the crimes he has allegedly committed wouldn't be translated as assault or rape in most countries. Though that doesn't necessarily mean he didn't do something bad to someone that requires legal recourse; what currently stan…

Furthermore, Assange specifically asked the prosecutors office if we was free to leave the country and they said yes.

Re: Julian Assange Seeks Asylum In Ecuador Embassy

#39

Post by nirvana »

Julian's situation seems very weird to me, given the stories about how secretive he was, how he kept in hiding, etc. At the same time, he was very clearly and publicly the face of wikileaks.

Why did he not simply remain anonymous? All that Wikileaks has done could be done without having a public figurehead, right?

Being public seems to have been the tactical error. (or was he trying to be anonymous, but got outed at some point and then given that he couldn't be anonymous anymore he decided to embrace it?)

Re: Julian Assange Seeks Asylum In Ecuador Embassy

#40

Post by sp332 »

hjalle wrote: post #38
sp332 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sweden is part of the EU, so yes.

Ecuador is not a part of the EU (obviously) so that would not matter, would it?

Not sure if you saw my edit above, but Ecuador has an extradition treaty with the EU, which includes Sweden.
Post reply on HN