back to article Assange™: Hey world, I'M STILL HERE, ignore that Snowden guy

Head WikiLeaker Julian Assange™ has said he is planning to leave the Ecuadorian embassy "soon", but neglected to say exactly when. In a press conference arguably designed to satisfy Assange's need for global attention more than the world media's thirst for clues about his future plans, the WikiLeaks founder dodged questions on …

  1. Ross K

    "Soon"

    Head WikiLeaker Julian Assange™ has said he is planning to leave the Ecuadorian embassy "soon"

    The filth may have other ideas, although he could have tunneled his way out of the embassy Great Escape-style by now.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "Soon"

      Two downvotes by 'tards who think 'Filth' means Assange, and one from a Police groupie? Or vise versa? Or....

      1. Ross K

        Re: "Soon"

        Two downvotes by 'tards who think 'Filth' means Assange, and one from a Police groupie? Or vise versa? Or....

        In hindsight, 'the filth' may have been a bit esoteric for some of the 'tards on here.

        I should have made it easier for the mentally challenged by using a different slang term for the police such as po-po, pigs, bacon, 5-0, narcs, bobbies, peelers, babylon, bizzies, etc.

        Also some people are sociopaths and love downvoting posts for no reason at all... It doesn't bother me.

        1. John Deeb

          Re: "Soon"

          Ross wrote: "downvoting... doesn't bother me."

          A whole post to explain yourself because you noticed some down votes? Do you have any self-reflection at all? Anyway, your posts were just bad on many levels: humour, comprehension and information wise. That's all that there's to it. But keep looking for that "other" reason if that makes you happy...

          1. Ross K
            FAIL

            Re: "Soon"

            A whole post to explain yourself because you noticed some down votes? Do you have any self-reflection at all?

            Ah, you must be one of the mentally challenged I was on about.

            1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

              @ Ross K

              With all your self-focused commenting, I suggest that you are, in fact, Julian Assange, AICMFP!

        2. IsJustabloke Silver badge

          Re: "Soon"

          or instead of trying to be "cool", you could have just used the word Police

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "Soon"

          There are a lot of Ass lovers out there by the look of things.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: "Soon"

        >>Two downvotes by 'tards who think 'Filth' means Assange, and one from a Police groupie? Or vise versa? Or....

        The first rule about downvotes is that you don't talk about downvotes!

      3. BillG Silver badge
        Paris Hilton

        Re: "Soon"

        Julian who?

        1. Anonymous Bullard
          Paris Hilton

          Re: "Soon"

          He's that wikipedia guy

    2. Thesheep
      Holmes

      Re: "Soon"

      I remember thinking it would take a man six hundred years to tunnel through the wall with it. Old Assange did it in less than twenty.

      1. Sureo

        Re: "Soon"

        What he needs is Amazon's drone to whisk him away.

        1. Frankee Llonnygog

          Re: "Soon"

          A Roman ballista, a circus cannon, or a series of trampolines ...

      2. Naughtyhorse

        Re: "Soon"...

        Julian Assange, crawled to incarceration reeking of shit smelling egomania I can't even imagine

  2. JimmyPage Silver badge
    Joke

    Obligatory ? Stewart Lee reference ...

    Stewart: "It's very easy to use words and logic to make someone look like they're selfish, simply because they've expressed a position that could be interpreted as that."

    Chris: "That's what Julian Assange says."

    Stewart: "I bet he does."

    1. ravenviz

      Re: Obligatory ? Stewart Lee reference ...

      And the timeless: "You can prove anything with facts"!

  3. Cliff

    Just wants to be loved

    And is punishing mummy and daddy because he wasn't. He needs help, not a platform!

  4. Longrod_von_Hugendong
    FAIL

    Sorry...

    We no longer care, oh, hold on - we never really cared to begin with.

    1. Jason Bloomberg Silver badge

      Re: Sorry...

      We no longer care, oh, hold on - we never really cared to begin with.

      Speak for yourself. True, I don't particularly care about Assange per se, but I do care about the predicament in which he finds himself.

      Given what passes for American justice, due process and punishment, I believe he has every reason to fear for his future. That he chose to break the law in jumping bail and effectively imprisoned himself rather than risk being extradited shows what a terrible state of affairs we have.

      There, but for the grace of god...

      1. Titus Technophobe

        Re: Sorry...

        If the intention is to export Assange ™ to the US why would the Feds trump up charges in Sweden? A country where it is harder to arrange extradition than the UK.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: A country where it is harder to arrange extradition than the UK.

          Possibly because it has a history of turning a blind eye to the actual rules?

          1. GitMeMyShootinIrons

            Re: A country where it is harder to arrange extradition than the UK.

            "Possibly because it has a history of turning a blind eye to the actual rules?"

            Poor argument - it would still be easier to get him out of the UK. The British legal system struggles to protect its own citizens, let alone an arrogant, hypocritical self-publicizing foreigner.

      2. Psyx

        Re: Sorry...

        " I do care about the predicament in which he finds himself."

        I don't intend ever getting all rapey and bail-jumpy, so it's not really relevant to me.

        1. bigtimehustler

          Re: Sorry...

          What a stupid thing to say, I don't intend on declaring a war on another country or landing myself on the moon. But most people are interested in things that happen outside of their own little world.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Sorry...

            " most people are interested in things that happen outside of their own little world"

            Whatever gave you that idea?

          2. Psyx
            FAIL

            Re: Sorry...

            "What a stupid thing to say, I don't intend on declaring a war on another country or landing myself on the moon. But most people are interested in things that happen outside of their own little world."

            What a stupid thing to say.

            Clearly I was being at least slightly ironic given that I'd not only read an article about it, but cared enough to add to the comments section...

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Sorry...

        Come on dear. He only cares about the oxygen of publicity, fanned by the dying embers of his own ego.

      4. Julian Taylor Silver badge

        Re: Sorry...

        Heavens forbid that Julian Assange should forego any publicity at all. I rather suspect that the whole story is contrived simply to provide him with a vestige of publicity. Shame he couldn't have done that 2 years ago and saved his backers the bail money and the taxpayer the cost of (as I hear Chelsea police refer to it) Operation AssEgo.

  5. Mtech25

    Well my cousin will be happy

    He is part of the Plod assigned to keep an eye out for Assange, one of the most boring jobs he has ever had.

    1. dotdavid

      Re: Well my cousin will be happy

      Boring until Assange's daring escape through the wikitunnel to the wikiairship!

      Hopefully neither will spring a wikileak!

    2. Piro

      Re: Well my cousin will be happy

      That detail was always one of the worst wastes of money.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Well my cousin will be happy

      I expect, being Plod, your cousin would much rather be assigned to Ferguson USA where he could indulge in Plod's favourite pastime of attacking those they are supposedly meant to "protect"...

      1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

        Re: Well my cousin will be happy

        It might be worth your pondering the fact that due to oversight, and regulations, the vast majority of the police (in this country at least) are almost guaranteed to be less corrupt than members of whatever profession you are engaged in.

        Whilst police work might nominally attract a certain personality type that likes to beat up on hippies in bean fields, the vast majority of officers are over-worked, underpaid and far too busy buried under piles of paperwork to be kyboshing anyone with their batons, and if they did, they would have to explain the footage from their bodycam to their superiors, or face some very tricky questions about why it was turned off.

        1. Naughtyhorse

          Re: explain the footage from their bodycam to their superiors

          what?

          like the pig wot killed that bloke in London that wasn't even part of the protest?

          Took years to get him out of his cushy job (despite his previous) and he avoided bird, but he murdered someone on the six o'clock fucking news!

          do me a favour.... guv.

        2. Keith 21

          Re: Well my cousin will be happy

          "if they did, they would have to explain the footage from their bodycam to their superiors, or face some very tricky questions about why it was turned off."

          Really?

          Let's ask the family of Ian Tomlinson, murdered by a member of the Police for the crime of Walking Home. What did the Police do? They lied. Repeatedly. Until independent footage proved that what eyewitnesses said had happened. Whereupon they decided not to press charges agains the Policeman who had attacked Tomlinson.

          Or what about Jean Charles de Menezes, executed (yes, EXECUTED) by the Police for "Lookin' a bit foreign".

          What did our valiant Police force do? They lied. And lied. And lied. They closed ranks. They decided that nothing wrong had happened, and decided not to press charges against any of the multiple officers who had held him down before pumping SEVEN bullets into his head at close range (out of 11 bullets fired over 30 seconds).

          They claimed he had leaped over the ticket barrier when they'd shouted for him to stop - even though it was proven he'd used his Oyster card and walked through the ticket barrier and the police hadn't shouted for him to stop. They claimed it looked as though his heavy overcoat was hiding a bomb, even though he wasn't wearing such an overcoat. They lied and lied and closed ranks and lied more.

          Not exactly the Dixon of Dock Green culture you claim, Loyal Commenter...

          1. Flyberius

            Re: Well my cousin will be happy

            It wasn't murder. It was manslaughter.

            Go write a poem about chick peas or something.

          2. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

            Re: Well my cousin will be happy

            Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that incidents of police brutality and corruption don't happen. The Menezes and Tomlinson cases are shocking and a sad reflection on the forces involved. It is worth noting that the officers involved in these were a) a special 'anti-terror' firearms unit, and b) riot police. both are far from the rank-and-file of the vast majority of police employees.

            I won't argue for a second that what the police did in either of these cases was right, and that the cover-ups that followed were not a disgusting indictment of the Met. One would hope that the lessons learned have been applied and that this sort of thing is less likely to happen in future. I'm not naive enough to think that a problem does not exist.

            However, extrapolating this behaviour to all members of the police, across the entire country, is grossly unfair to the vast number of honest, hard working officers.

            The introduction of body-cams is a good thing in that it records both the conduct of the officer, and the public towards them. If an officer decides to get over-zealous with his truncheon and he is wearing a body-cam, he'll have a hard time denying it. Conversely, if he has to deal with a violent drunk who attacks him with a broken bottle, and later claims he was assaulted by the police, the evidence is there to show what actually happened. I would hope that the correct oversight is taken in storing and retaining such evidence, as it goes a long way to restoring public trust in policing, which on the whole, in this country is very fair and even-handed. I would also hope that it manages to root out the bad apples in the barrel, and when tragedies such as Menezes do happen, provides evidence as to who was ultimately responsible.

            1. DropBear Silver badge

              Re: Well my cousin will be happy

              I reserve judgement about those being of any use until after the first couple of cases where people claim injustice and the tape actually backs it up and leads to proper punishment (which, just to be clear, is not "we left the back door open, Jim, walk out and retire now with full benefits, and the matter needs not be mentioned again"). As opposed to, say, the public screaming for the tape while the cops go "What's that...? We can't hear you..."

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Well my cousin will be happy

        Oh F**k off

    4. Benchops

      Re: Well my cousin will be happy

      It may seem boring now, but wait until Assange actually exits the embassy and starts talking to him.

  6. Alister Silver badge

    As soon as I heard that he had "Arranged a Press Conference" this morning, my immediate thought was, ha, he wants some more media coverage...

    It's a shame, but that's all he means to me now - an attention seeking nobody (allegedly).

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      To be fair, the definition of a press conference is a meeting to gain media attention.

      Obviously in this particular case he is an attention-whore. It's interesting that Ecuador's foreign minister was just whining in the Guardian about how the UK had apparently violated his human rights by not letting him flee from justice, but forcing him to face his accusors in court like anybody else.

      He even had the cheek to say to the Guardian that only his legal team and the government of Ecuador were behaving reasonably. I don't know how the UK could have been any more reasonable. He brought his troubles here of his own accord, was given bail, a transparent legal process and the right of appeal.

      Admittedly I don't approve of the European Arrest Warrants, because they're open to abuse from legal systems that are worse than our own. But I wouldn't say that about the Swedish system. And Assange can't really claim that either, given that he applied for residency in Sweden not much before running away from the place - which makes his arguments about US extradition look rather rubbish.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    He needs the attention, but still...

    Although I do believe that it is important for Assange to remain somewhat in the news (am I the only one who's thought after reading this was: "Whoah, 2 years already?") I also can't help wonder if this doesn't work against him as well?

    Because I know in the beginning the British government had posted police agents outside of the building to make sure that he didn't come out. I can't help wonder if that was still the case after these two years (I simply don't know). Because if it wasn't the case then surely there should have been some option to get out of the country, optionally with the help of the embassy personnel?

    As to wikileaks... I still think we need something like this. I've always wondered; the media's attention has always been pointed at Assange as the one who caused all the misery and drama, and of course also the person who is to blame for all of it.

    But the thing is; if the people who's crimes (because that's what they were at times!) hadn't committed those in the first place they would have been in the clear and Assange would have had nothing on them to publish.

    Even so; there still seems to be this tendency that Assange is the bad buy, and strangely enough: everyone seems to easily forget about the people who's crimes he has pointed out in public.

    Because what ever happened to those criminals? And don't give me "for the greater good" please, because that was also more or less the argument when it came to the US invasions in Iraq and Afghanistan and well; its kinda hard to keep under lids I guess, but it's anything but good over there. The situation in Iraq has even gone worse and downhill really fast. I'd say Iraq has become more of a threat to world peace than it has ever been before.

    1. Rob Crawford

      Re: He needs the attention, but still...

      My view on this is simply that there where (and still are) superior whistle blowing websites out there.

      Non of their 'founders' found it necessary to change their mobile phone every couple of days and travel incognito and only stay in associates homes.

      Additionally the other sites always seemed to release more relevant information than WikiLeaks used to reveal.

      But then again the likes of Cryptome (for example) didn't have a narcissistic (oops sorry charismatic) leader, who tried to claim ownership of stolen material (sorry Julian it's not yours).

      You also fucked over just about everybody that did support you, threw crap at the Guardian when you didn't get your own way and you are still bleating.

      BTW you where a shit hacker and coder too

    2. phuzz Silver badge
      Meh

      Re: He needs the attention, but still...

      It's quite possible to support the aims of Wikileaks, whilst thinking that Assange is a self aggrandising dickhead.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: He needs the attention, but still...

      Let's keep the various issues separate - that Assange is trying to conflate them doesn't mean we have to follow that.

      1 - Wikileaks. WL lost in my eyes all credibility the moment they threatened to release all material they had at once if any of them were harassed/arrested/whatever. If I were a government I would have called that threat immediately because from a media perspective I would have a few bad days and that would be that. I could live with the breaches of the law if they served the common good, but if disclosure is used as a lever we've entered the realms of blackmail. But OK, let's assume for a moment they fulfil a function somehow not covered by other sites such as Cryptome.

      2 - Assange™. Assange <> Wikileaks. It was self evident early one that for Assange, the goals of Wikileaks were secondary to his own image building. Unfortunately, Assange comes with a lot of baggage and (judging by events) a collection of bad habits, with a variable approach to personal hygiene apparently the most innocent. Assange is not even smart - the mess he is in now was entirely of his own making and was avoidable if he had not chosen to go into hiding instead. If Assange /has/ any talent, it is the talent to consistently pick the worst option out of any selection, and the ability to truly believe hos own BS.

      The US won't touch him - not only are they not interested in making a martyr out of him, but Assange has also already demonstrated that his approach to being in a hole is to order mining equipment. Being smart for a change, the US leaves Assange well alone, and so starves him of the oxygen of attention he so desperately craves.

      3 - The Bad Stuff Out There. Assange is a textbook example of how NOT to deal with that. We do need to press for more transparency in the use of powers granted to government, that is a political issue. We do need to make sure that people taking the decision to go public with Bad Stuff are protected, insofar that their disclosure could not have been done any other way, and insofar that the disclosure is limited to waking up the public and the authorities and nothing more. The "let's throw it all on the street" approach is IMHO dangerous, and for balance it must be possible to get the story from the other side too (here too, we must assume innocence before guilt).

      I have in the past couple of weeks dealt with a case of entrapment where someone's account was hacked and offensive images were placed, after which the police was tipped off, so watching the Cliff Richard thing play out without an ability of the accused to defend themselves is exactly the kind of "crucifixion by press" that will be used by anyone who wants to smear someone's reputation or use such as a threat to compel collaboration (I have admittedly also ended up with a complete disrespect for the police's approach to "investigation" which is aimed at ignoring as much as possible any signs that the person under investigation is actually innocent, partly because out of ignorance of how things actually work - think someone barely able to use Windows making "official" assertions about Linux).

      We must be careful with vigilantism because we may end up being used and become pawns ourselves. Let's not forget that the need for whistleblowing flags issues that should have been caught MUCH earlier, and we must work to improve the sort of transparency that will show up abuse, and the sort of ethics that avoids certain bad decisions. Personally, I think the latter will be the hardest work of all.

      In this context, Snowden has acted with far more responsibility. I am glad that Assange was unsuccessful in trying to associate himself with this to get a slice of that publicity.

      Those are, of course, my own views, but I believe that anyone who states that Assange's rights have been "violated" is casually overlooking the fact that if it had been anyone else he would have been already shipped back to Sweden instead of first pushing the case as high as it could go under UK law. I hope he comes out soon, I can full understand that he's getting ill. Heck, I already get that after ONE box of Ferrero Rocher, let alone 2 full years of it...

      1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

        Re: He needs the attention, but still...

        watching the Cliff Richard thing play out without an ability of the accused to defend themselves

        I'm not sure how you think the CR thing is playing out, but as far as I am aware, his main complaint was that he was not forewarned that the police would be raiding his home. Forgive me for my naivete, but I was not under the impression that it was common practice for the police to forewarn suspects. Something to do with destroying evidence. The South Yorkshire police have also been very explicit in stating that the BBC contacted them, because they had been tipped off by a third party, rather than the other way round. It seems like the current attitude of the police is to NOT tip the press off in cases of investigations into celebrities, and everything the police have done in this case seems above board to me.

        The identity of the third party that tipped the press off has not been revealed AFAIK, but it could be any one of a number of people, from an alleged victim, to their friends, or relatives, to someone bugging a police station - any guess is just that - pure speculation. We have been told that it was not the police, and we have no reason, other than suspicious minds, to question that.

        CR has also been given the freedom to make public statements (which he has done). As a multi-millionaire, it's not as if he doesn't have the resources to defend himself. The cynical might suggest that the timing of the raid (when he is out of the country) is precisely because of the resources that CR may have at his disposal to make things turn out in his favour (rightly, or otherwise).

        Lets let any evidence come to light, and the police investigation complete before we jump to any conclusions. Unless you are directly involved in the police investigation (are are the accused, or alleged victim), you are not in full possession of the pertinent facts to make any sort of judgement.

        1. Annihilator
          Holmes

          Re: He needs the attention, but still...

          "The South Yorkshire police have also been very explicit in stating that the BBC contacted them, because they had been tipped off by a third party, rather than the other way round. It seems like the current attitude of the police is to NOT tip the press off in cases of investigations into celebrities, and everything the police have done in this case seems above board to me."

          Perhaps - but then they're missing the point that if it wasn't the police that tipped off the Beeb, then who was it? If it were only the police aware in advance, then the only logical conclusion is that the police leaked it to someone else, who then leaked it to the Beeb. I'm not sure that keeps the SY police squeaky clean - it got out somehow..

          1. qwertyuiop

            Re: He needs the attention, but still...

            Aah, the South Yorkshire Police. That fine upstanding force.

            <cough>Hillsborough<cough>

            1. Ross K
              Devil

              Re: He needs the attention, but still...

              Aah, the South Yorkshire Police. That fine upstanding force.

              <cough>Hillsborough<cough>

              The force with the nice officers who went to court to sue for the psychological damage they endured that day - after the families had been told they couldn't get compensation.

              1. BongoJoe

                Re: He needs the attention, but still...

                I was contemplating a career in the police until the miners' strike started

                This picture http://www.defendtherighttoprotest.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/miners-strike-orgreave.jpg was the reason that I changed my mind.

                1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                  FAIL

                  Re: PongoJoe Re: He needs the attention, but still...

                  "I was contemplating a career in the police until the miners' strike started

                  This picture http://www.defendtherighttoprotest.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/miners-strike-orgreave.jpg was the reason that I changed my mind." I call male bovine manure. What, are you scared of horses?

                  1. BongoJoe

                    Re: PongoJoe He needs the attention, but still...

                    You can smell all you like but that was pure fact.

                    I am from the North East and I was seriously considering a career with plod. My father was a copper for a while and I thought that I would make a decent copper myself.

                    A couple of things changed that. First that picture which truly sickened me at the time. The second was the sight of the police waving five pound notes at the strikers.

                    I don't know if you remember those times or whether you're from the Northern coalfields but that really sickened a lot of people, myself included. That made my mind up for me; was it goung to be coppering or into IT. I then went into college in the late 70s to study Computer Science.

                    No idea why I got the downvote though, everything that I wrote was factual and accurate. As I say my father was a copper before me (though he had retired from the force before the strike) as was devasted by what was going on on our television screens.

                    You can disbelieve, you can call me a liar, you can downvote me. But that picture was one of the principle factors for me to change my mind about becoming a copper.

                    1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                      FAIL

                      Re: PongoJoe He needs the attention, but still...

                      "You can smell all you like but that was pure fact...." The only thing that smells around here is your story. What, you saw a picture, presumably in a paper (Socialist Worker, perchance?), and immediately assumed 'that copper is doing wrong' rather than considering that the copper might have been legally justified in raising his baton? Despite what a large section of the ill-informed public (and some journos) believe, journos do not get some freedom to act outside the law as they wish. A copper is just as legally within proper rules and law to move a journo that is part of a crowd illegally gathered as an ordinary member of said crowd. If a copper says you are interfering with a police activity (of which dispersing a violent mob that is illegally interfering with the delivery of coal to a British Steel plant is one example) then a 'journo' is just as bound to move on or be physically forced to move on as any other member of the public so involved. It sounds like you would have been very poor material for a copper, and it sounds like your 'ex-copper' dad had forgotten a lot of the law he should have been able to explain to you. Especially seeing as Lesley Boulton was no journalist anyway. Oh, yes, that is a hint of your imminent come-uppance.

                      Not only that, but in those pre-Internet days you managed to keep track of the one picture, presumably because it so 'scarred' you, that you could instantly retrieve it almost forty years later at the drop of a hat? Gosh, that doesn't at all sound like you went to one of the staple anti-police websites and got it from there..... It's not like Lesley Boulton, the member of Women Against Pit Closures (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_Against_Pit_Closures) in the pic (and not a journalist as often claimed), had a political reason to smear the police involved. Oh, didn't you realise there were those of us on the other side of the political divide that might know a thing or two about the Leftie propaganda surrounding the so-called Battle of Ogreave? Like the fact it happened in 1984, a bit late to effect your choice of studying IT in the 'late Seventies'.

                      Pull the other one, it's got bells on it.

        2. David Dawson

          Re: He needs the attention, but still...

          Not quite.

          The BBC were waiting for the police to arrive at his house, therefore they weren't just aware that there was an investigation in progress, but the date and time of the raid. That information was given to them, by the police, by their own admission.

          The reason they gave was they the BBC said "we'll wait to publish if you tell us when the raid is", which they agreed to.

          This is wrong, the BBC shouldn't be proposing deals like this, but the police should certainly not accept them.

          What is now happening is that they are effectively investigating him completely in public, while he's not in the country. So, they haven't given him notification or questioned him yet, it might come to nothing.

          To my mind, that seems somewhat prejudicial. By all means say "wait for the evidence", but this is trial by mob.

          In these cases, there are broadly two totally conflicting and opposed points of view; one side says "we need to publicise the name so that others have the courage to come forward", like with Saville and the others over the past few months. On the other side, these allegations will never leave him now, he will forever be branded 'pervert', no matter the result of the investigation or any subsequent court case

          A complex ethical question like this deserves a thoughtful answer, not the blunt destructive tool that is trial by media and collusion by the police with journalists.

      2. Desidero

        Re: He needs the attention, but still...

        Wikileaks never used the "let's throw it all on the street" method - they vetted through media outlets, and set the standard for responsibility. Where things did fall apart was when some asshat at the Guardian published what he thought was an old unused password which surprise turned out to still work on various archives (didn't he know things are eternal on the internetz?) - and being an asshat, he continued to blame Assange, even though Assange likely deserves some blame for not anticipating asshats.

        Anyway, working off of standard US government slander after all this time? Not cool - facts are fairly easy to check - just use teh Google.

        1. Brangdon

          Re: He needs the attention, but still...

          Wikileaks reused passwords, which is a basic security error. The Guardian journalist should not have published the password for his private sample anyway; but he had no way of knowing it had been reused on publically available archives.

  8. Pisartis

    Assange ... suffering from a range of health problems, including "... bad eyesight".

    Does this mean generations of mothers were correct? It does make you go blind?

    1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

      After two years of Ecuadoran porn, who knows...

    2. Mtech25
      Paris Hilton

      Come on

      If that is the case then I would... need... glasses,

      Bugger

  9. LucreLout Silver badge

    Logic fail

    What kind of absolute moron confines themselves to a couch in a small room for two years, away from family and friends, and at no small fincancial and reputational cost to his backers, because he wants to avoid spending time confined to a small room?

    Logically, Assange either imprisons himself in the embassy until he dies, or he must eventually come out and face whatever punishment he'd have faced anyway. He's not going to be awarded time served as he isn't in custody.

    All he can possibly have achieved is damage to his health, and harsher punishment due to the addition of charges for jumping bail. Worse, for him, is that his relevance declines every time there's another Snowden, so its now unlikely that any actual extradition to gitmo would raise more than an eyebrow from the populace at large.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Logic fail

      Possibly because one of the other small rooms he may end up in will have a slanted board and a bucket of water nearby.

      1. James O'Shea Silver badge

        Re: Logic fail

        "Possibly because one of the other small rooms he may end up in will have a slanted board and a bucket of water nearby."

        Nah. Just putting a few members of the Swedish Bikini Team on the _other_ side of the bars would be sufficient. especially after two years of Ecuadorian porn.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Logic fail

        slanted board and a bucket of water nearby.

        Oh, come now. I'm sure Swedish prisons have washing machines these days...

      3. This post has been deleted by its author

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Logic fail

        Possibly because one of the other small rooms he may end up in will have a slanted board and a bucket of water nearby.

        Not a chance. The US is not going to risk raising his profile by making him a martyr. They'll leave him well alone so he can crawl back under a rock in obscurity.

      5. LucreLout Silver badge

        Re: Logic fail

        "Possibly because one of the other small rooms he may end up in will have a slanted board and a bucket of water nearby."

        It's a risk, sure, but that's where he goes anyway when he leaves the Ecuadorian embassy. His only other choice is to stay there until he dies.

        Were he half a smart as he likes to pretend, he'd realise that he's already in prison - and most British prisons probably offer better accomodation for a low level offender. I expect Sweden to be the same.

    2. sandman

      Re: Logic fail

      You do wonder if he wouldn't be more comfortable in a Swedish prison. That is assuming that he's guilty of the crimes he's accused of and is actually given a custodial sentence. Even if the Swedes decide to deport him to the States and he ends up Gitmo, at least it's sunny ;-)

      1. ratfox Silver badge
        Angel

        Re: Logic fail

        My hope is that he is eventually, after many years, caught; sent to Sweden; trialled; then sentenced to a week of community service. I think the worst punishment for him would be when he realizes that there is in fact no extradition awaiting because nobody cares about him anymore.

        1. LucreLout Silver badge

          Re: Logic fail

          "My hope is that he is eventually, after many years, caught; sent to Sweden; trialled; then sentenced to a week of community service."

          I think he's actually more afraid of that than gitmo.

          He'd be an absolute laughing stock, moreso even than he already is. His credibility would be ruined even harder than it already is.

      2. James O'Shea Silver badge

        Re: Logic fail

        "That is assuming that he's guilty of the crimes he's accused of and is actually given a custodial sentence."

        As i understand it, he _can't_ be given a custodial sentence for his alleged crime. _He has already voluntarily locked his silly Ass(tm) up for two years for an offence for which he couldn't be locked up_. Yes, he's really that scared of the Feds.

        1. No, I will not fix your computer

          Re: Logic fail

          >>As i understand it, he _can't_ be given a custodial sentence for his alleged crime. _He has already voluntarily locked his silly Ass(tm) up for two years for an offence for which he couldn't be locked up_. Yes, he's really that scared of the Feds.

          I'm pretty sure that you _can_ be locked up for rape in Sweden.

          My view is simple, he should face the interview and (potential) charges in Sweden, the alleged victims deserve that much.

          The whole extradition thing is a separate issue, I suspect that the US (and if the alleged leaked "pending" extradition is true), then perhaps Assange will have an opportunity to validate the actions of people like Maning and Snowdon, imagine the outcry against the US if there is some conspiracy, imagine the US trying to cover it up, FOI would reveal all kinds of wrong doing.

          I guess what I'm saying is that if the US government is playing a game, Assange should have the courage of his convictions and play it, if they are not, then perhaps he should turn himself in anyway.

          Easy for me to say? absolutely! but then I've never asked anyone to take all the risk and act against their government (even if it's for the greater good).

          1. Desidero

            Re: Logic fail

            "the alleged victims deserve that much" - for what? being groupies? it's fine for 15 minutes of fame in "Almost Famous" / Cameron Crowe films, or a bit of fun Vanilla Fudge/Led Zeppelin red snapper perversion, but unless Assange actually pulled a Mike Tyson or Phil Spector on the lasses, really, this "he tricked me into having unprotected sex" or "the condom broke, maybe on purpose" bit is pathetic. Really, there is a helluva lot of rape and abuse that goes on in this world that should be punished, and this bullshit makes a mockery of it. Most self-respecting police departments would have closed this book quick and got on with real crimes.

          2. DiViDeD Silver badge

            Re: Logic fail

            "I'm pretty sure that you _can_ be locked up for rape in Sweden."

            Yes, you can. But nobody is talking 'rape' here (except the UK tabloids and certain commentards).

            You cannot be locked up for sex by surprise in Sweden, and this is the offence with which he MAY be charged after any interview with the Swedish authorities. Unfortunately, sex by surprise (fairly literal translation) is not a crime anywhere else in the EU (or the world as far as I know), and as such has no direct counterpart in UK law. because of this, the media, at the start of this affair, went through a whole spectrum of euphemisms, from 'indecent behaviour' through 'a sexually related offence' and 'sexual assault' until finally settling on the term 'rape' as being both acceptably understandable to viewers and listeners, while maintaining the correct air of shocked melodrama to attract eyes to screens and bums to seats.

            to my mind, the description of what, even in Sweden, is considered a minor offence, punishable by a maximum fine of ~7,500kr, as 'rape' is both misleading and an insult to the victims of real rape.

            .. and breathe

            1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

              Re: Logic fail

              DiViDeD,

              Just to clear this up yet again, he's accused of rape. I haven't seen the sex by surprise crap defence trotted out by his supporters in a while now...

              Go and look up the Supreme Court judgement: at this link here.

              The court sat on the legality of the European Arrest Warrant system. I think this was the test case for it. And accepted it. That was the only legitimate matter under discussion, since the system as set up does not allow for political or judicial interference in the process. So long as a police force / prosecutor can get the right paperwork in their own country, the other country's police and courts are simply supposed to shut up and hand their citizen over. This is the reason I personally oppose the EAW system, and prefer extradition, even though it's more expensive and time-consuming.

              However, the court then went on to consider Julian Assange's other legal arguments. Despite the fact that they were totally irrelevant to the UK courts, and were therefore made for PR purposes only. As I (and the court) said, the EAW doesn't give discretion to this country, we've simply handed some of our sovereignty over to the Swedish prosecutor's office.

              The court decided that there was prima facie evidence for 2 counts of rape. It might have been 3, I can't remember if ripping the condom is even still on the charge sheet, or be bothered to check. The first is that he's alleged to have held the first victim down, with his weight rather than by violence, and tried to force himselve on her. She'd said no sex without condom. That is rape in anyone's book (if true). He's then supposed to have stopped that, put his condom on like a good boy, and is alleged to have deliberately damaged it while she wasn't looking.

              The other accusation was that he waited until woman number two was asleep, she'd also said no sex without condom, and then had sex with her without one anyway. The Supreme Court ruled that this was also rape under UK law, as it's sex without consent. He'd have had consent with a condom, but none without and someone who's asleep, unconscious or drunk can't give consent.

              As Ken Clark got in trouble for saying, some rapes are more serious than others. Assange didn't force himself on some random stranger at knife-point. But what's accused of is a hell of a lot more serious than some 'bedroom hijinks'. And his supporters, and he, do their case a lot of damage by trying to pretend that these charges aren't very serious.

              Given it's their word against his, I'd have thought he's quite likely to get found not guilty whatever the truth is.

              Finally I don't think you can apply for an EAW unless the alleged crime carries a possible custodial sentence.

            2. Matt Bryant Silver badge
              FAIL

              Re: DeLuDeD Re: Logic fail

              "....sex by surprise in Sweden, and this is the offence with which he MAY be charged after any interview with the Swedish authorities. Unfortunately, sex by surprise (fairly literal translation) is not a crime anywhere else in the EU...." Geez, are The Faithfull still repeating that load of baloney? As was explained, by an UK judge in an UK court during A$$nuts weaselly attempts to avoid extradition, what A$$nut is accused of doing would be considered rape under UK law. If you don't know even the most basic facts about the case then please go do a lot more reading before you embarrass yourself here with your infatuated hero-worship again.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: DeLuDeD Logic fail

                > As was explained, by an UK judge in an UK court during A$$nuts weaselly attempts to avoid extradition, what A$$nut is accused of doing would be considered rape under UK law.

                I had missed out on that, too. Link please!

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: DeLuDeD Logic fail

                  Oh, I see "I ain't Spartacus" had provided the relevant link already. Thanks!

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Logic fail

          As i understand it, he _can't_ be given a custodial sentence for his alleged crime. _He has already voluntarily locked his silly Ass(tm) up for two years for an offence for which he couldn't be locked up_.

          What he does in his spare time or while he is fleeing from justice doesn't count, I don't know where you got that idea from.

          Yes, he's really that scared of the Feds.

          Actually, I don't think he is, that's just BS to pump up his own martyrdom. Assange™ knows full well nothing of the sorts will happen, but it benefits him greatly playing that role because it continues to make headlines for him. I suspect that Assange is very well aware that the moment he gets to Sweden he'll be back in obscurity because he'll probably get some token fine and is then turned out on the street with all his BS about the US interest in him dispelled.

          Personally, it can't be happening fast enough.

        3. Annihilator
          Boffin

          Re: Logic fail

          "As i understand it, he _can't_ be given a custodial sentence for his alleged crime"

          He can be given a custodial sentence for his actual crime of jumping bail though...

    3. Killing Time

      Re: Logic fail

      The kind of absolute moron who thinks his desperate attempt at martyrdom will make any difference at all. A delusional egotist whose relevance faded several years ago.

      There is no reasoning with them, just wait them out, it’s their lives they waste. At least he has been confined to only damaging himself.

      1. John Deeb
        Trollface

        Re: Logic fail

        Killing Time: "A delusional egotist whose relevance faded several years ago."

        Still way better than being a delusional egotist who never had any relevance at all, mostly because of lack of sufficient skill, understanding and balls. In my opinion that sums up 82.4% of Assange's critics and 24.5% of his supporters.

    4. James O'Shea Silver badge

      Re: Logic fail

      looks as though you stepped on the toes of one of Julie the Ass(tm)'s followers...

      1. Killing Time

        Re: Logic fail

        Oooh, looks like I did. Presumably St Julian's maths skills are better than his supporters?

  10. Rikkeh

    "42,000 pages" of evidence gathered against him

    An oddly specific claim here.

    How does he know? What counts as 42,000 pages? Did they print every single email that was sent (along with the duplicate text of the thread repeated below) and how did they set out page borders? Is that 42,000 pages in native file format, or is it when the document management system outputs it all to an image file?

    Or has he simply made up this number because it sounds big and vaguely realistic?

    1. lglethal Silver badge
      Joke

      Re: "42,000 pages" of evidence gathered against him

      It's the ultimate answer (ok times 1000). Julian just thought the Ultimate Question was "How many pages of evidence do the US government have on me?"

  11. PCS

    "British government had posted police agents outside of the building to make sure that he didn't come out."

    To make sure he didn't come out???? Try "to arrest the barsteward when he did come out for breaching his bail conditions and extraditing him to another European country where he has an arrest warrant out in his name for questioning in relation to accusations of raping two women"

    1. DiViDeD Silver badge

      "country where he has an arrest warrant out in his name "

      No he doesn't!!

      There is no arrest warrant issued in Sweden because he HASN'T BEEN CHARGED WITH ANYTHING THERE.

      The EAW that was issued is an EU legal instrument issued by one EU country requiring any and all other EU countries to hold a suspect on their behalf. It was originally intended as a method of dealing with serious criminals and terrorists, not as an excuse when the state prosecutor has a change of heart, but there you go - it's legally binding. It's also the only warrant issued outside of the UK. There certainly has never been a warrant issued in respect of the rape of two women. Anyone who believes that 'we were having consensual sex when the condom broke, and although we continued to have sex, some three days later it was suggested to me that he might have allowed the condom to break on purpose' is the same thing as actual rape needs to take a serious rethink.

      I don't hold much respect for Assange, but I can't subscribe to the current medimob driven exaggerations and outright lies about the case.

      1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

        The European Arrest Warrant was not designed for "serious criminals and terrorists". It's part of the EU delusion of statehood. As well as being quite a sensible response to having a single immigration and working area covering a large chunk of a continent, so that police can operate across borders (as criminals do). I don't approve of the loss of sovereignty myself, and think extradition is the appropriate tool, but if the EU really does break down the barriers to the free movement of people (so it's as easy to move house and job within the EU as the US), then there's a perfectly fine argument for it.

        I'm no expert on Swedish law, but I'd imagine an arrest warrant is exactly what it is. Arrest before charging is normal. In the UK system, you usually arrest someone before an interview if you think that there is a serious chance of charging them. If someone has buggered-off (in Assange's case out of the country) after being called to that interview, you might issue an arrest warrant, to ask other police to go out and get him for you.

        There's no media exaggeration. Most stories I've seen have used the term sexual offences, rather than rape. Although rape is an accurate reflection of the charge according to the UK's Supreme Court. What there actually is, is a campaign of trivialisation of serious allegations by Assange, his legal team and his supporters.

        He gets the benefit of the doubt, innocent until proven guily is important. But by fleeing justice, and lying about how serious the allegations are, as well as lying about leaving Sweden with permission, when his lawyer had already been told he was wanted for questioning again, I am a lot less inclined to assume his innocence than I'd otherwise be.

      2. Matt Bryant Silver badge
        FAIL

        Re: DeLuDeD

        "....There is no arrest warrant issued in Sweden because he HASN'T BEEN CHARGED WITH ANYTHING THERE....." That's because the Swedish legal system works differently to that of the US or UK in that a suspect is charged a lot later in the proceedings. A$$nut skipped the country before the Swedes could charge him and has refused to go back since. Once again, all you are doing is rebleat in outdated A$$nut propaganda - have you been asleep for the last two years?

  12. Stuart 22

    Does the court case matter?

    The trouble is - we all assume the Feds were out to get him and framing him might be too tempting. How are we - or any court or judge - be able to tell the difference between a well crafted set up and a genuine case of rape?

    The guy's best hope is go and take his (small?) chance in court and serve his time and hope he can avoid a deportation. Surely it doesn't take this long to negotiate that?

    He might be not a nice person or even worse. But he did some good in his Wikileaks days.

    1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge
      Thumb Down

      Re: Does the court case matter?

      How are we - or any court or judge - be able to tell the difference between a well crafted set up and a genuine case of rape?

      That's why we have courts and legal systems in the first place. If you're assuming that they are all incompetent or corrupt (which is a considerable insult to the millions of people who work in them) then perhaps you should just get a bigger tinfoil hat and go back to hiding under the bed?

      1. Stuart 22

        Re: Does the court case matter?

        "That's why we have courts and legal systems in the first place. If you're assuming that they are all incompetent or corrupt (which is a considerable insult to the millions of people who work in them) then perhaps you should just get a bigger tinfoil hat and go back to hiding under the bed?"

        I am afraid it is you who is assuming stuff that I neither wrote nor thought. Which is why I fervently hope you are not one of the millions working the system.

        A competent and uncorrupt court can only come to its decision based on the evidence presented. Well crafted fake evidence looks just like the real thing. We can assume (oops I know that is dangerous) there is enough evidence (real or fake) at face value to convict Assange. You assume that all fake evidence will be rooted out Rumpole like. When it is done by professionals that is an unsafe assumption.

        Tin foil time? Well that's the problem. A cursory conclusion from their own documents liberated by Snowden and Assange would suggest the American authorities do not feel bound by their and other jurisdictions to not do illegal stuff. So does this include this case?

        I don't know. The fact you think you do know invites me to ask - how?

        1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

          Re: Does the court case matter?

          A competent and uncorrupt court can only come to its decision based on the evidence presented.

          Indeed so, and that decision could well be "this evidence isn't convincing".

          Well crafted fake evidence looks just like the real thing.

          Evidence doesn't come in neat boxes. It consists of objects, timelines, witness testimony, and much more. In Assange's case the primary evidence is the testimony of the two girls that he continued to have sex without a condom when they had refused consent for that. Are you suggesting that the girls will be paid or threatened to lie sufficiently well that they'll convince a judge, without being uncovered by a competent defence team?

          We can assume (oops I know that is dangerous) there is enough evidence (real or fake) at face value to convict Assange.

          So you're prejudging the court? I would make no such assumption.

          You assume that all fake evidence will be rooted out Rumpole like. When it is done by professionals that is an unsafe assumption.

          And you assume that it can be crafted in such a way that it cannot be rooted out. That, I suggest, is an even more unsafe assumption. You appear to be assuming that Assange must prove himself innocent, which isn't the case. It's also why courts rely on the principle of "beyond reasonable doubt" to prove guilt.

          Assange may be a narcissitic, self-aggrandizing asshole, but I've seen nothing to suggest that he won't get a fair trial in Sweden, nor any good reason that the Swedes wouldn't want him to have one.

          1. Stuart 22

            Re: Does the court case matter?

            "Assange may be a narcissitic, self-aggrandizing asshole, but I've seen nothing to suggest that he won't get a fair trial in Sweden, nor any good reason that the Swedes wouldn't want him to have one."

            Nor do I. Does that surprise you?

            You do seem intent to take and twist almost every word I have written to try and present it as saying the opposite. For example claiming I am prejudging the court when I speak of evidence at face value. Did you miss the word 'face'? The point of a court is to subject evidence to the highest scrutiny before accepting it. Otherwise we could just let the prosecution attorney to decide guilt. Face value is what it is before scrutiny.

            Can courts get things wrong, not uncover ... yes they do. That's why you have appeal courts, and supreme courts and pardons.

            Please don't make me suck eggs. I'm going to stick with the idea that so many games are being played around and by Assange that you or I don't stand an earthly determining what is or is not true. You appear to have complete confidence the court can. I believe they may be our best chance of determining the issue which is the very reason we have courts. I have no evidence that Swedish Courts are anything but amongst thee best in the business. But are they are not immune by being manipulated or deceived by external forces?

            The bottom line is I have less confidence than you. Let's leave it there please and not keep on accusing me of stuff I never did. You certainly don't deserve any place in court other than the dock.

          2. Desidero

            Re: Does the court case matter?

            "but I've seen nothing to suggest that he won't get a fair trial in Sweden"

            Please... as 1 of many examples:

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition

            "Ahmed Agiza and Muhammad al-Zery, two Egyptians who had been seeking asylum in Sweden, were arrested by Swedish police in December 2001. They were taken to Bromma airport in Stockholm, had their clothes cut from their bodies, suppositories inserted in their anuses and in diapers, overall, handcuffs and chains put on an executive jet with American registration N379P with a crew of masked men. They were flown to Egypt, where they were imprisoned, beaten, and tortured according to reports by Swedish investigative programme "Kalla fakta"[78] The Swedish ambassador visited them only six weeks later. Agiza was previously charged and sentenced in absentia with being an Islamic militant and was sentenced to 25 years, a sentence that was reduced to 15 years due to the political pressure after the Rendition became known. Al-Zery wasn't charged, and after two years in jail without ever seeing a judge or prosecutor he was sent to his village in Egypt. In 2008 AL Zery was awarded $500,000 in damages by the Swedish government for the wrongful treatment he received in Sweden and the subsequent torture in Egypt."

            More: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/05/cia-rendition-help-european-leaders

    2. Psyx

      Re: Does the court case matter?

      "He might be not a nice person or even worse. But he did some good in his Wikileaks days."

      That is and should not be of any relevance to a Court.

      Rapeyness or not, we know that he is absolutely guilty of jumping bail and contempt of court in the UK.If you or I did that, we'd be banged up. why should he be any different?

      What is there about this person that means they should not suffer jail for jumping bail?

    3. Androgynous Cupboard Silver badge

      Re: Does the court case matter?

      @Stuart 22, what exactly do you think a trial is for if not "to tell the difference between (...) a set up and genuine case". It's the defining purpose of any trial.

    4. a cynic writes...

      Re: Does the court case matter?

      The accusation is that in two cases women went to bed with him on condition he put on a condom and he didn't. As I remember it in one case she said she would drop the complaint if he had an AIDS test.

      It could just be me but I don't think that sounds like "a well crafted set up". To my mind a well crafted set up would suggest he'd taken money to edit the information released. A few deposits in a bank account set up in his name, a few spooks at the same hotel and a suspiciously detailed official denial would have done the trick.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Does the court case matter?

        "The accusation is that in two cases women went to bed with him on condition he put on a condom and he didn't. As I remember it in one case she said she would drop the complaint if he had an AIDS test."

        Many of us won't always have been as careful as we should have been in our youth, or otherwise have had nodders break, but sitting where he is, facing what he imagines he's facing, surely that would be a slam dunk? Next time you get blood drawn, have it tested and the results faxed to her. I can't imagine he has had all these disparate diagnosis without a blood test.

        Unless, of course, he knows what the result is and that she won't like it.

      2. Desidero

        Re: Does the court case matter?

        Come on, it's been years - just look up details of what's known to have happened:

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1307137/Supporters-dismissed-rape-accusations-WikiLeaks-founder-Julian-Assange--women-involved-tell-different-story.html

        Woman A was supposed to leave him her apartment, but returned early to sleep with him, and said she thinks he broke his condom on purpose.

        Woman B was infatuated with him and tracked him like a groupie, and it sounds like the evening sex was with condom, the morning sex without.

        As a slightly important aside, the chance of a heterosexual non-IV drug user having HIV is rather tiny. But that will start another Reg blowup.

        1. LucreLout Silver badge

          Re: Does the court case matter?

          "As a slightly important aside, the chance of a heterosexual non-IV drug user having HIV is rather tiny. But that will start another Reg blowup."

          It's almost certain to be higher for someone that goes out barebacking every one nighter he can get his sweaty mits onto.

          If the women in question practice safe sex, particularly with guys they don't know, then no matter what the stats say, he has no right to deny them that.

        2. Matt Bryant Silver badge
          FAIL

          Re: Desidero Re: Does the court case matter?

          If the accusations against A$$nut are 'such clear fabrications', why is he so scared to go face a Swedish court over them then?

          1. Desidero

            Re: Desidero Does the court case matter?

            Cause the US does such a bangup job of middle-of-the-night renditions and black hole prisons, something they did whisking a couple blokes out of Sweden in 2001 - hasn't this been repeated over and over?

    5. LucreLout Silver badge

      Re: Does the court case matter?

      "But he did some good in his Wikileaks days."

      Ok, what good did he do?

      As far as I can see neither Asshat nor Wikileaks ever actually accomlished anything of note, other than ensuring Brad Manning never again see's the light of day. That, is not good.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Please

    I would like to ask the gentlemen who seem to take pleasure in sniping at Mr. Assange, that they behave with a modicum of civility, as they would in front of any other person.

    Other than observing that he's not very good at handling PR, and that he seems to have antagonised the media, therefore ensuring that his name is going to be dragged through the mud for the pleasure and entertainment of the unwashed masses, I have no opinion on this person as regards his character, motives, or his legal position for that matter.

    However, and whether willingly or unwillingly cooperating through his actions or not, he is being used as a distraction from some serious issues that certain people need accounting for, as ShelLuser has pointed out above.

    In the meanwhile, I would like to inform some of you that sitting there and calling someone--not to his face--a wanker or a moron does not make you look big or clever, neither is that helpful in any way whatsoever.

    Thank you for listening.

    1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    2. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

      Re: Please

      I have no opinion on this person as regards his character, motives, or his legal position

      Why not?

      He's wanted on charges of sexual assault, which he denies but refuses to stand trial. When released on bail his first action was to jump bail, thus sticking his erstwhile friends with the bail costs. He has since spent two years hiding out in a foreign embassy with which he has no connection, at their expense, simply to avoid the risk of extradition. Every so often he pops up to make sure that people don't completely forget about him.

      I'd say that gives a pretty clear view of his character, motives, and legal position. None of which looks very pleasant.

      1. James O'Shea Silver badge

        Re: Please

        "I'd say that gives a pretty clear view of his character, motives, and legal position."

        Got it in one.

        "None of which looks very pleasant."

        That it doesn't.

        1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

          Re: Please

          "I have no opinion on this person as regards his character, motives,"

          Motives? He's got another book coming out soon so needs to get back in the news.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Please

            Motives? He's got another book coming out soon

            Really? Who would want to read that after his first book? I bet he has to self publish it..

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Please

        > I have no opinion on this person as regards his character, motives, or his legal position

        > Why not?

        Because any knowledge I may have about this person or his actions is through the media, and I have first-hand experience (plus some basic training in handling media enquiries, provided by my employer at the time) on how the media turns facts and opinions into a product that can be sold. Let us say that one would not do well to put any confidence on an opinion formed solely on the basis of information gathered through the media.

        I am not making any assertions, good or bad, as regards this person. However, that is beside the point. Even if I did have an opinion, and possibly an unfavourable one, I would still not approve of puerile anonymous¹ insults in a public forum, for that would be a) immature, b) pointless, c) lacking in respect towards the subject, d) lacking in respect towards the forum in which I participate, and e) one of those things that could be taken as an excuse for further restrictive legislation, as seen not long ago in the UK. Ultimately we all come worse off it.

        ¹ Yes, I use the anonymous posting feature of this website. I try not to misuse it though.

    3. Chris Hunt

      Re: Please

      I'll apologise to Mr Asshat when you've finished apologising to the whole population for describing them as the "unwashed masses."

      And I'd be happy to call him a wanker to his face, were he not skulking in an embassy at considerable expense to the taxpayers of the UK and of Ecuador. Maybe, when he gets out, he could get a gig presenting this show:

      www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYEMNab00bw

    4. Marvin O'Gravel Balloon Face

      Re: Please

      Any thoughts on his behaviour re: shafting friends who loaned him £200,000 of bail money? Or maybe in his handling of the Manning defense fund?

    5. Psyx

      Re: Please

      "In the meanwhile, I would like to inform some of you that sitting there and calling someone--not to his face--a wanker or a moron does not make you look big or clever, neither is that helpful in any way whatsoever."

      If it helps, I'd gladly call him a wanker to his face if he'll come out of his hidey-hole.

    6. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: Please

      Speaking as a member of the unwashed masses (an ironic comment given that Assange seems to be a bit of a soap-dodger, by the accounts of journalists he's worked with), I feel I have every right to make unfavourable comment about Julian Assange. Which I would be perfectly happy to say to his face, were the occasion to arise.

      You see he's come to my country and abused its freedoms. At quite considerably cost to us poor, put-upon, unwashed tax-payers. And incdientally a few of the more credulous celebrities who chose to support him and/or his cause. He's bitched and moaned about the rather excellent due process which we allowed him. Then abused the fact that he was granted bail to fuck off to a foreign embassy to hide for a couple of years, avoiding the consequences of the mess he got himself into in another country.

      I don't believe in pre-judging the outcome of trials. However he's not exactly acting like someone who's innocent. Now admittedly his suddenly developed fear of US extradition could be his well-documented paranoid tendencies showing through. But it's funny how he was willing to ask for residence in Sweden before the accusation was brought against him, and when he fled Sweden it was to the UK. Both of us have extradition treaties with the US - and that only seemed to start bothering him after he was wanted for questioning on 2 rape cases.

      As you say though, he's not very good at handling PR. Or people in general, I rather suspect. And he does seem to be a rather mixed-up guy. But I find a lot to disapprove of in both his personal and professional actions. And the fact that he's so obsessive about protecting his personal details, while happy to leak others' - along with his cavalier attitude to what Wikileaks published and what its money got spent on (i.e. himself) - I'd be grateful if he'd stop ponficiting on how unfair life is on poor old Julian.

      he is being used as a distraction from some serious issues that certain people need accounting for

      Careful, your tinfoil hat is slipping here... Used? Used by who? If he's a distraction from the causes he supports, then that's because he continues to act like an egotistical arsehole. Getting himself mixed-up in not one, but two, rape allegations doesn't exactly help. I do feel sorry for him, as I suspect it isn't much fun to be Julian Assange. But he has a choice about what actions he takes. And he does seem to leave a trail of betrayed friends and colleagues. Which doesn't speak well for his character.

  14. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Heroes

      Some day you will find that your childhood heroes aren't really that heroic.

      1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    2. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    3. hammarbtyp Silver badge

      Re: Heroes

      He's not the Messiah you know, just a very naughty boy

      1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge
        Happy

        Re: Heroes

        He's not the Messiah you know, just a very naughty boy

        Oh dear. Does that mean he's going to take all his clothes off, and address the adoring masses through the embassy window?

        In which case, can I vote for the BBC not to send any cameras...

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Heroes

          Oh dear. Does that mean he's going to take all his clothes off, and address the adoring masses through the embassy window?

          Upvote for the Life of Brian reference and bringing some levity to this otherwise yawn inducing topic..

  15. StampedChipmunk

    Doesn't matter about Sweden...

    It no longer matters about Sweden, or whether or not he'll be deported to the US or whether there's a case the actually be answered in Sweden OR in the US.

    The moment he broke his bail restrictions and fled to the Ecuadorean embassy, he broke British Law. There is no doubt about this, no questions raised about he said/she said, no questionable documents, he broke British Law.

    The moment he steps outside the embassy, Plod will (hopefully) bang him up so that he can face those charges. Then it's up to Sweden and the US to demand extradition from Britain through the usual channels, and they would have to make their cases to the British and (dependant on appeals) European courts.

    But St. Julian will first have to answer charges of skipping bail here in the UK. There may even be a civil suit or two from the people who fronted his bail money to consider as well...

    1. smartypants

      Practical Interim Cost-saving measure

      Replace the real policeman outside the embassy with an inflatable alternative*.

      After all, it could be quite a long wait.

      ----

      *Such placebo police might be useful in other circumstances, such as:

      - Notting Hill Carnival (having to be 'seen to enjoying the wonderful spectacle')

      - Football Crowds (Bits of seat, when hurled, will just bounce off harmlessly without injury)

      Deflated versions could be built into the floors of buses and trains to be inflated at the touch of a button when a (necessarily short-sighted) 'oik' causes a minor inconvenience on a train.

      What could possibly go wrong?

      1. Alistair Silver badge
        Coat

        Re: Practical Interim Cost-saving measure

        "Deflated versions could be built into the floors of buses and trains to be inflated at the touch of a button when a (necessarily short-sighted) 'oik' causes a minor inconvenience on a train."

        Shirley there's an autopilot that might have a vector on that Victor.

      2. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge
        Happy

        Re: Practical Interim Cost-saving measure

        Hmmm. Placebo police.

        The placebo police dismisseth us.

        Howsabout: Policebo? Plodcebo? Pneumati-pig / pneumati-plod? Blowbobby?

        This idea has potential. Inflatable police cars in turnings near accident black-spots. Everyone slows down. We could have inflatable anti-terrorist policemen at Glasgow airport, after all they've got the hardest baggage handlers in the land (John Smeaton), so we can save the expense...

        1. Fred Flintstone Gold badge
          Coffee/keyboard

          Re: Practical Interim Cost-saving measure

          "Blowbobby" is simply epic, hahaha.

          That's my keyboard done for..

  16. lansalot

    ..

    Unable to visit the local nightclubs for 2 years, that'll explain his poor eyesight then...

  17. coastwalker

    yawning public

    I guess we had forgotten all about the organ grinders monkey - Assange.

  18. James O'Shea Silver badge

    Hmm

    You mean that Julie the Ass(tm) is still alive? Who knew? Okay, he can go back into hibernation for another two years now.

  19. James O'Shea Silver badge

    testing

    It appears that I'm not supposed to post anything about St. Julie the Ass(tm). Let's see if this one goes through...

    1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

      1. James O'Shea Silver badge

        Re: testing

        Son, for about an hour everything I did on this particular forum (upvote, downvote, post) didn't go through. I tried three different browsers on two different computers running different OSes. I sent a little note into el Reg. They replied to the effect that there had been a problem and that it was now fixed. Some of my old posts, including the one to which you replied, popped up shortly thereafter.

        And, no, i suspect that given the fact that I'm considerably bigger and in better shape than Julie the Ass(tm) it wouldn't be _me_ who got his ass kicked should St. Julie poke his nose out of the embassy. Assuming, that is, that he got to do anything whatsoever before being hauled off to be locked away for jumping bail.

        But you're entitled to your fantasy world.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: testing

          I like to know what he said, because whatever it was, it got his entire account deleted!

          http://forums.theregister.co.uk/user/71232/

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Perhaps they should hold a regular lookalike competition outside the embassy.

    :)

    Anon, because sometimes my jokes end up becoming true.

  21. xyz

    "Hello, Snowden, Assange here, got other dirt on the Brits?"

    "I'm thinking of taking a holiday 'soon' and I need a nice ass shafter bit o' info on Cameron and his mates that'll stop plod lifting me....what's that? No I don't fancy Ebola.,. thanks anyway."

    If Julian of Knightsbridge is about to stride out of his diplomatic hostel, he must be in possession of a hefty piece of leverage. Bets please!

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Someone should post his medical records on wikileaks.

  23. heyrick Silver badge

    Uhhh...

    What kind of nut job actually brags about how much "evidence" has been gathered against him?

    And how does he know how much anyway, unless the Feds get a kick out of reporting to his lawyer ever increasing numbers because they know he'll fall for it . . . 40,000 pages is no big deal but if we hit 45,000 then we're screwed! Julian, it's not an oil change!

  24. b166er

    'Press conference: ME ME ME ME ME ME ME (cont'd pg 94)'

    Ironic then, that it's The Reg giving him voice.

  25. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I know why Assange's waiting..

    It's all explained here.

    I'm sure the world is waiting with baited breath for a self obsessed tosser to mince over the stage. Maybe he can model ball and chain?

    1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      WTF?

      Re: AC Re: I know why Assange's waiting..

      "....It's all explained here....." Hmmm, my first thoughts are that must be a late submission for the April 1st edition, but them again it is St Jules, Patron Saint of Egotists.....

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I know why Assange's waiting..

      > baited breath

      s/baited/bated/

  26. Bob Wheeler
    Joke

    Give him credit.....

    At least he is giving the boys in blue some notice that he's coming out.

    i'ts not like he can sneak past them and get away now and make them look foolish.....

  27. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It's been many years since England has had two sunny summers on the trot...bad luck Julian. spending them in a box bedroom.

  28. qwertyuiop

    Meanwhile...

    ...can we all take a moment to remember Chelsea Manning who, unlike Assange, really _IS_ imprisoned and really was tortured. Her torture continues as the US Army appears to be reneging on its earlier promises to allow her gender treatment - http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2014/08/18/attorneys-for-chelsea-manning-promise-fight-if-pentagon-doesnt-grant-gender-treatment

    1. LucreLout Silver badge

      Re: Meanwhile...

      Erm, shirely without gender treatment Chelsea is still Brad?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Meanwhile...

      Imprisonment was inevitable for the actions undertaken. Nobody has yet made a credible case for what crimes Manning's leaks exposed. Snowden you can make a valid case for, even if perhaps not a valid defence of, but Manning.... I'm not so sure.

      Certainly Manning was ballsy, but then, any man willing to have his knackers chopped off probably has bigger balls than me!

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Meanwhile...

        Certainly Manning was ballsy, but then, any man willing to have his knackers chopped off probably has bigger balls than me!

        HAD bigger balls ...

      2. DiViDeD Silver badge

        Re: Meanwhile...

        Actually, imprisonment is inevitable for ANYONE leaking information at the level of Secret or above. That's how the law stands in the US. I was amused to hear John Kerry suggesting that Snowden should 'man up' and come back to the US to defend his actions when, in reality, there is NO DEFENCE. If you reveal priviliged information about National Security (and bot does that cover a wide range these days!), you are automatically guilty and subject to the full penalty. it really doen't matter whether that leak exposed traitors or corruption at the highest level, or that providing the information was in the public interest. The very admission that you were responsible for the leak allows for no defence and no extenuating circumstances, it's simply an automatic 'Go Directly to jail' card.

        In law, there's actually no defence you can offer at all.

        1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
          FAIL

          Re: DeLuDeD Re: Meanwhile...

          ".....In law, there's actually no defence you can offer at all." Complete cobblers. Snowjob could legally argue he was exposing a criminal act by revealing secrets, but seeing as the US legal system has already looked at the revelations and said 'no crime here, all covered by FISC warrants', Snowjob would not get very far with that excuse. The reality is Snowjob has no legal grounds for his calculated treachery. That is why Snowjob will not return to face the music, because he knows what he did was not just illegal but traitorous too.

          1. Desidero

            Re: DeLuDeD Meanwhile...

            He's an Australian citizen - how can leaking US secrets be traitorous to Australia? how is it illegal when he's not in the US and not subject to US law?

            1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
              Facepalm

              Re: Desidero Re: DeLuDeD Meanwhile...

              "He's an Australian citizen....." You must be new here, either that or easily confused. Or both. 'Snowjob' refers to Snowden, who is an US citizen and very liable for treason even if he subsequently gains citizenship in another country. 'A$$nut' refers to Assange, who is the Australian. Please do try and keep up.

              1. Desidero

                Re: Desidero DeLuDeD Meanwhile...

                Easily confused? It's 4 pages of ravings over Assange & then Snowden pops up. Never mind.

                Snowden on the other hand did everyone a favor - at least there are Congressional reviews now, whereas before the CIA & NSA kept stonewalling Congressional oversight.

    3. FrankAlphaXII

      Re: Meanwhile...

      The Army had better damned well not let a convicted felon engage in "treatment" on my fucking dime, especially while Tricare won't pay for it for people who should be entitled to it if they so choose, even if it is considered medically necessary. For a convict to get it, and the Army to pay for it with our medical appropriations is ludicrous when there are people who deserve decent medical treatment and aren't getting it. Convicts should be the very last priority for AMEDD when medical care for Soldiers who don't go around breaking laws sucks shit.

      You keep saying torture, but I really don't think you know what it actually means. Being degraded and verbally abused isn't right, but its pretty fucking far from being waterboarded, walled, beaten with bamboo rods, mock executed, electrocuted, lashed with electrical cable, etc.

  29. Stevie Silver badge

    Bah!

    Tee Hee. Reminds me of the reporter character "Mimi Ditto" from The Lone Groover in the 70s.

  30. Zog_but_not_the_first Silver badge
    WTF?

    Eh?

    "...investigators had amassed 42,000 pages worth of evidence on him."

    Clearly, they were unfamiliar with Cardinal Richelieu's maxim,

    "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him."

  31. Desidero

    Truly strange.

    As much as the US's FBI has been known to set up unwitting clueless "terrorists" by supplying them all the materials, and assorted other nasty tricks towards non-Americans beyond the Constitution, the people here largely seem to think the Yanks wouldn't have set up Assange with a couple of tarts.

    (we did of course launch a whole war or 2 under false pretenses - why would lying about Assange slow us down any?)

    Of course the rape charges knocked Assange off his roost - the threat of whisking off to the US made it doubtful he could respond but was just gravy. (the double whammy is often employed to better effect - such as when Clinton had a political requirement he not assert his constitutional right - damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

    More worrisome is simply that the people bitching here don't much care for the negative affects of the government's manipulation & deceit that's only grown steadily in the last 10 years. Instead, Assange and Snowden are the only egotists, despite the overwhelming bloviating from the PM's seat on down (or that Nobel Prize winner in the White House....)

    And please note, it's very doubtful the Ecuadorian government is going to piss off the Brits by sneaking Assange out - it has to be done overtly.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      As much as the US's FBI has been known to set up unwitting clueless "terrorists" by supplying them all the materials, and assorted other nasty tricks towards non-Americans beyond the Constitution, the people here largely seem to think the Yanks wouldn't have set up Assange with a couple of tarts.

      I'm sure the girls will thank you for this assertion, one that doesn't appear to be based on any available facts. But don't let that stop you.

      More worrisome is simply that the people bitching here don't much care for the negative affects of the government's manipulation & deceit that's only grown steadily in the last 10 years. Instead, Assange and Snowden are the only egotists, despite the overwhelming bloviating from the PM's seat on down (or that Nobel Prize winner in the White House....)

      If people care, they will also NOT care much for being manipulated by Assange to keep his precious face in the press. By doing so, he has not only damaged whatever was left of his "reputation", he also damaged the work of others and basically pissed on the friends who put their money on the line to bail him. Assange has singlehandedly done more to /damage/ the "cause" than any effort of the US could have achieved.

      1. Desidero

        Of course it's based on the facts - 1 of the girls looks specifically to be a setup who then disappeared, the other one possibly or else a clueless groupie. Colluding on the facts after-the-deed/OMG she-slept-with-him-too to go running to the police with? over what, an exploding condom? wow, that's a charge worth incarcerating 2+ years for. 2 consensual encounters and the police are going to find anything to charge on a he-said-she-said overnight in a bedroom when she fixed him a nice public brekkie in the morning, then went & complained to the bobbies? only in Sweden, though not the beloved "I am Curious Yellow" Sweden back in the 60's.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          I'm really not in the mood to /again/ repeat the facts. Read the police report yourself and stop revising history. Assange wasn't happy with the report leaking because it kinda buggered up his myth (to paraphrase Eddie Izzard)..

  32. DougS Silver badge

    Why would two years in a London embassy affect his health?

    Was it built on a toxic dump?

    If he's got heart problems and eye problems and whatever, it seems likely he had them before or at the very least would have developed them anyway.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Why would two years in a London embassy affect his health?

      Well, there is two years worth of Ferrero Rocher to consider. It's a nice snack, but there are limits.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Why would two years in a London embassy affect his health?

        So he's responsible for the massive increase in hazelnut prices. Now it makes sense

    2. Desidero

      Re: Why would two years in a London embassy affect his health?

      Clueless question #1 - uh, he doesn't get any light, and he can hardly walk more than 100 meters or get any reasonable exercise, plus humans suffer psychological issues through confinement that can affect their physical health as well.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Why would two years in a London embassy affect his health?

        humans suffer psychological issues through confinement that can affect their physical health as well

        It's actually an interesting question: does this psychology still apply if the confinement was by choice (or through idiocy, which in this case happily coincide)?

  33. pctechxp

    And the point of all this is?

    So he's been holed up there for two years.

    What really did he think was going to change?

    The guy wants to be hailed a hero so why not come out and face this music?

  34. bussdriver

    Obscurity is his biggest threat

    The USA can blow up it's own citizens and their citizen children without hardly any trouble; because those people are obscure nobodies. Assange needs attention to stay alive; as well as keep the outrage going and he is still the figurehead for wikileaks... nobody in their right mind would want to take over that position (honestly, I don't Assange would allow that, but his personal issues are basically off topic. So it does help the USA that his org is distracted and diluted; which would have happened eventually since that is a classic propaganda tactic.)

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Obscurity is his biggest threat

      Nope. Assange damaged Wikileaks by being, well, Assange and becoming the story himself.

      Snowden did a much better job because he kept the focus on the issues rather than on the messenger.

      1. Desidero

        Re: Obscurity is his biggest threat

        I'm sure if the US could have slipped a sex scandal into Snowden they would have been happy to.

        As it was, the best they could do was "he leaked secrets to the Chinese", being a rather liberal interpretation of "he gave docs to the Hong Kong news media".

        Of course Assange made Wikileaks about himself by... lessee, by having private consensual sexual encounters? (I guess he carries as much responsibility as Bill Clinton in that regards - God knows he's a critically important politician and an inspiration/bad example for children). Oh, then having a public tiff with Domscheit-Berg, the purer Wikileaks member who split off from the org and went on to do great... errr, nothings? Or was it Assange making the US block all its credit card payments? Yeah, the dude just brought it all on himself - I guess he should have just waltzed to Gitmo or Quantico to get the Bradley Manning take-it-like-a-man-now-girl treatment.

        As someone else here noted, yes, shooting the messenger - the US government and military is filled with egotistical bastards like Petraeus who "trained" the Iraqi & Afghanistan police to great acclaim only to discover they're completely worthless and desert at first chance. Yeah, he got his sex scandal too, fortunately for Obama. Stanley McChrystal? resigned, having egotistically insulted the Commander-in-Chief to a reporter. Raymond Davis, CIA agent who assassinated 2 Pakistanis in broad daylight - whisked back to the US. Outsourced Halliburton policy led by Dick Cheney himself which led to the gunship atrocities Wikileaks reported. (and that nice extrajudicial drone killing, and those nice Abu Ghraib pyramids, and the recent US rape-and-sodomy-and-murder pictures withheld for 7 or 8 years. But Assange is the only ego here to complain about...)

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Obscurity is his biggest threat

          by having private consensual sexual encounters?

          No, by having private non-consensual sexual encounters, hence the rape allegations.

          1. Desidero

            Re: Obscurity is his biggest threat

            For frak's sake, *CONSENSUAL*. The first one the only question was whether Assange tore his condom on purpose - a rather unusual fetish one surmises - the sex was consensual, aside from her claiming it was going too fast & she was uncomfortable (but let's just get it over with?), and then he stayed in her flat a week longer.

            The second one had sex with a condom with him *willingly* and then it's the question whether he later entered her while sleeping without a condom.

            http://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden

            (You'd think with Assange's animal magnetism, penchant for 1-night-stands and apparent aversion to condoms that it'd be easy to find a flock of pretty young things around the world who'd been demeaned & bullied by him into unprotected sex - but I haven't seen such a revelation - score 1 for the defense).

            Of course Miss B apparently is so concerned about disease in 2 1/2 years she never had sex with her ex without a condom, but oddly is not so concerned about stalking a famous stranger and going to bed with him at first chance (has someone clued her in on efficacy of condoms, me hopes?)

            The broken condom that Miss A gave police surprisingly has no Assange DNA on it -

            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2203920/Condom-used-evidence-Assange-sex-case-does-contain-DNA.html

            http://rt.com/news/assange-condom-no-dna-277/

            Continuing, "That she has published on the internet a guide on how to get revenge on cheating boyfriends ever graver. The exact content of Wilén’s mobile phone texts is not yet known but their bragging and exculpatory character has been confirmed by Swedish prosecutors. Niether Wilen’s nor Ardin’s texts complain of rape."

            How about Miss B (Wilen)? "However, his second accuser, now 29, who claimed to have been raped in her sleep by Assange, apparently told police she had not been opposed to having unprotected sex with him despite previous statements to the contrary, the daily reported."

            There you have it - clear as mud - that awful Assange and those women who just can't keep their stories up. Occam's Razor says go for the simplest explanation - paying 2 gals to coordinate an exploding condom/disappearing condom story is simpler than getting knocking Assange out of the public eye by discrediting his actual revelations.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              FAIL

              Re: Obscurity is his biggest threat

              > it's the question whether he later entered her while sleeping without a condom.

              If you think that counts as consensual, heaven help any woman you meet.

              1. Desidero

                Re: Obscurity is his biggest threat

                Note the followup where Miss B said it was all consensual. It's useless for me to keep writing facts when folks would rather trade in stale innuendo. We know the basics of the story, there's no there there.

                It would have been very simple for the prosecutor to get on a plane and interview him in England because setting a precedent of "guy who leaks info on the US worried about being stuffed in a CIA rendition plane" isn't exactly a huge set of cases. And typically for human rights cases, these are exactly the types of conditions that humane governments are supposed to protect from, not hide under bureaucratic process of "wir müssen Ordnung haben" when it's exactly that order that's Orwellian. What'd we get instead? More US spying on national leaders and huge dragnet of EU information.

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Obscurity is his biggest threat

              Not sure why you would quote the dailymail and rt.com when you can have the authority all readers here succumb to state it themselves:

              http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/09/17/assange_case_police_report/

  35. Frankee Llonnygog

    When he finally leaves

    How long before somebody posts a speeded up video of the event with Yaketty Sax on the soundtrack

  36. bailey86

    Why are people having a go at the messenger?

    Go and see the video footage of the heartless, infantile helicopters pilots murdering civilians including children.

    And of course the US of Hate is going to try to get Assange into Gitmo - look at how hard they tried to get McKinnon for merely finding that the idiots had not set passwords on their servers.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Why are people having a go at the messenger?

      merely finding that the idiots had not set passwords on their servers.

      Hmm, next time you forget to lock your house I do hope you won't complain when someone steals all your belongings and trashes it. After all, you'd just be an idiot who deserved it and they wouldn't be criminals, no?

      1. bailey86

        Re: Why are people having a go at the messenger?

        That's right Anonymous Coward - I'd blame myself for being careless and stupid. I certainly wouldn't call for the death penalty/gitmo treatment for the chancers who wandered in and took my stuff. I wouldn't be happy with them but I'd be an adult and take responsibility for my own slip-up.

        It's about time more people started acting like grown-ups and facing up to their screw-ups - rather than calling in the spin-doctors, Feds and SWAT teams to say 'there, there, there - all bedder now - you can stop crying."

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Why are people having a go at the messenger?

      Go and see the video footage of the heartless, infantile helicopters pilots murdering civilians including children.

      Ah, you're referring to the video that casually omitted the bit where said innocent people were loading up on weaponry, and of which the full version led to hasty retractions?

      There IS plenty to put on show (as Snowden has proven), so creatively editing material is about the most stupid thing you can do: when it comes out, it pretty much destroys your credibility for good. I reckon the US must have thought it was Xmas when they found the complete footage.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Why are people having a go at the messenger?

      And of course the US of Hate is going to try to get Assange into Gitmo

      Repeat: not a chance. They're not going to help him become a martyr (although, given the "heroism" that some misguided people seem to attribute to Assange™ I would have expected him to have walked out already towards the US embassy screaming "take me, take me, you bastards" as that would certainly help focus "the world" -it's always something grand- on the evil US and give him the instant celeb status he seems to crave. No? QED).

  37. bailey86

    And Jasper. Jasper...

    I'm sure if you'd been stitched up by the world's demented superpower you'd be keen to spell it all out. Shame on you for calling it 'ranting' when you probably wouldn't have the balls to take on the USA in the way Assange has.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: And Jasper. Jasper...

      you probably wouldn't have the balls to take on the USA in the way Assange has

      "Taking on"? As in "fearfully prodding the bee hive and immediately running for the hills when you hear a buzzing sound" taking on? As in letting someone else like Manning take the fall after promising support? As accepting someone's money for bail and then bolting the moment he's free?

      It seems the astro turfers have finally woken up.

  38. Marketing Hack Silver badge
    Childcatcher

    Julian is leaving? What will the donut shops do without the hungry cops?

    The last two years have probably led to an increase in Central London wasteband size and donut maker luxury car sales.

  39. isacdaavid
    Holmes

    What a sensationalist headline

    Looks like some pseudo-journalist is trying to disrupt the high opinion Assange and Snowden have about one another.

    http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/1c/71/20/1c7120a34cbb463ec57c7445664fa553.jpg

    1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: isaacdavid (yeah, right!) Re: What a sensationalist headline

      "Looks like some pseudo-journalist is trying to disrupt the high opinion Assange and Snowden have about one another...." I assume that your mind had so little room that, after they had crammed in your socio-political views, there was simply no space left for a sense of humour? And as for A$$nut's and Snowjob's 'love' for each other, it is a biological fact that parasitical organisms prefer the 'company' of others of their breed, why should it not be the same for social parasites? Snowjob needs to keep onside with The Faithful, they are his future meal ticket.

  40. Dodgy Dave

    El Reg needs to get the facts straight

    According to the IPO - http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/4/EU009734096 - Julian Assange(R) is now a registered trademark.

    Whether he will sue over the flood of unauthorised Assange(R) dolls which will doubtless be appearing in the kids' aisles in Tesco's remains to be seen.

    1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      Happy

      Re: Dodgy Dave Re: El Reg needs to get the facts straight

      "....Julian Assange(R) is now a registered trademark...." I have to wonder if he got his gullible and ri ch buddies to cough up the application fee along with the bail he jumped.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019