How can Sweden fairly prosecute Assange when they don't prosecute GW Bush?

[Watanabe]

Lying is not against a law. (Exception: Lying to court. maybe few more could be found.)

I think lying your country into a war should be worth court martial, funny GWB was not even impeached.

A non-sequitur. You asked for examples of the Swedish criminal justice system not yielding to political pressure. A request for extradition is, by its nature, political. An honest person would say "Thank you for providing evidence supporting your position."
A dishonest person would try to distract from this fact.

Personal attack noted.

Some of us have fun and he provides good training ground. (especially in self control )

There are plenty of other threads to comment in if you want

 

[trustbutverify]

Even if true (and there would need to be some evidence for this) lying isn't a crime unless you do it under oath in court.
So by not arresting GWB equality before the law is being upheld.

A fact for which Watanabe should be eternally grateful, as I have demonstrated.

 

[TjW]

Personal attack noted.

Where did I attack you, personally?

 

[Watanabe]

A fact for which Watanabe should be eternally grateful, as I have demonstrated.

And another personal attack here..

 

[trustbutverify]

And another personal attack here..

Absolutely not, simply a statement of cold, hard fact as you know.

 

[Klimax]

Lying is not against a law. (Exception: Lying to court. maybe few more could be found.)

I think lying your country into a war should be worth court martial, funny GWB was not even impeached.
...

Unproven that he knew it was false. As for impeachment, you'd need to ask in USA Politics. (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6) Not much of topic here.

Anyway, what does it have to do with Assange?

 

[Watanabe]

Unproven that he knew it was false. As for impeachment, you'd need to ask in USA Politics. (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6) Not much of topic here.

Unproven that Assange raped anyone

Anyway, what does it have to do with Assange?

Sweden is an ally of the US still did not do much against GWB
But went all the way to the UK to prosecute Assange.

Which is suspicious.

 

[The Don]

Unproven that Assange raped anyone

Which is why Assange will be put on trial in Sweden. There is at least enough evidence to try Assange and he stands accused of something for which he can be tried under Swedish law.

Sweden is an ally of the US still did not do much against GWB
But went all the way to the UK to prosecute Assange.

Which is suspicious.

As has been explained a number of times in this thread (and which you appeared to acknowledge when you changed your demands from Sweden trying GWB to Sweden calling for the ICC to try GWB to Sweden just criticising GWB to sufficient degree - but I see that you've reverted to your original position now), there's nothing on the Swedish statute book that would allow them to prosecute GWB and any attempt to deport GWB even if there was a crime for which he cold be prosecuted in Sweden (which there isn't) would fail.

On the other hand Julian Assange stands accused of multiple sex-crimes which are prosecutable under Swedish law, which are sufficiently serious to warrant requesting his extradition from the UK and which are covered under the terms of the European Arrest Warrant framework decision.

The lack of suspicion is also supported by an assessment of the Swedish justice system which is acknowledged to be both fair and politically independent (unless of course you have some evidence to the contrary)

 

[The Don]

Do you have any evidence that this is the standard even when the accused is also the person behind one massive release of leaks?

Well, several newspapers provided coverage of the leaks

- El Pais
- Le Monde
- Der Spiegel
- The Guardian
- The New York Times

...and they have not been prosecuted in the US. The person behind the leaks, Bradley Manning, has been changed. Julian Assange was only responsible for distributing the leaks - like the newspapers listed above - the newspapers that have not been prosecuted.

 

[Watanabe]

Well, several newspapers provided coverage of the leaks

- El Pais
- Le Monde
- Der Spiegel
- The Guardian
- The New York Times

...and they have not been prosecuted in the US. The person behind the leaks, Bradley Manning, has been changed. Julian Assange was only responsible for distributing the leaks - like the newspapers listed above - the newspapers that have not been prosecuted.

The role of Assange in showing the leaks was, by far, bigger than all the newspapers above

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning#Disclosure_of_classified_material

 

[Watanabe]

Which is why Assange will be put on trial in Sweden. There is at least enough evidence to try Assange and he stands accused of something for which he can be tried under Swedish law.

While in the mean time GWB is happy in his ranch in Texas

As has been explained a number of times in this thread (and which you appeared to acknowledge when you changed your demands from Sweden trying GWB to Sweden calling for the ICC to try GWB to Sweden just criticising GWB to sufficient degree - but I see that you've reverted to your original position now), there's nothing on the Swedish statute book that would allow them to prosecute GWB and any attempt to deport GWB even if there was a crime for which he cold be prosecuted in Sweden (which there isn't) would fail.

There is also nothing in the Sweden statute book that would prevent Sweden to sever any military relatioship with the US

On the other hand Julian Assange stands accused of multiple sex-crimes which are prosecutable under Swedish law, which are sufficiently serious to warrant requesting his extradition from the UK and which are covered under the terms of the European Arrest Warrant framework decision.

While starting an unnecessary war based on lies incorrect intelligence is worth only a mild tatement of criticism.

The lack of suspicion is also supported by an assessment of the Swedish justice system which is acknowledged to be both fair and politically independent (unless of course you have some evidence to the contrary)

Evidence that the above is also true when the suspect is involved in one of the biggest leasks in human history?

 

[The Don]

The role of Assange in showing the leaks was, by far, bigger than all the newspapers above

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning#Disclosure_of_classified_material

That's debatable. Julian Assange was an editor on a fringe interest web site with little or no mainstream credibility. The newspapers on the other hand are well respected and each have an audience of millions. Millions of mainstream readers who don't frequent the fringes of the internet.

Those newspapers got the information front and centre in people's awareness.

 

[Watanabe]

That's debatable. Julian Assange was an editor on a fringe interest web site with little or no mainstream credibility. The newspapers on the other hand are well respected and each have an audience of millions. Millions of mainstream readers who don't frequent the fringes of the internet.

Those newspapers got the information front and centre in people's awareness.

Please read the link I have quoted.

 

[The Don]

Please read the link I have quoted.

I did and it highlighted some excellent reasons why the US wouldn't want to prosecute Julian Assange because he (Assange) was a passive recipient of information instead of coaching Bradley Manning into providing it.

 

[The Don]

While in the mean time GWB is happy in his ranch in Texas

Irrelevant. Julian Assange stands accused of serious sexual assault crimes in Sweden, GWB is not.

There is also nothing in the Sweden statute book that would prevent Sweden to sever any military relatioship with the US

That is not within the purview of the independent Swedish judiciary. Its independence prevents it from ruling on things like this.

While starting an unnecessary war based on lies incorrect intelligence is worth only a mild tatement of criticism.

I'm not going to comment on whether the war was necessary or not or whether gathering incorrect intelligence is a crime under international law in this thread because it would once again derail it - I'm happy to discuss that in a separate thread (or one of the many threads where this has been discussed ad-nauseam).

In terms of the Swedish judiciary, Julian Assange has been accused of, and charged with sexual assault and so Sweden has pursued the standard process to bring him to trial.

Evidence that the above is also true when the suspect is involved in one of the biggest leasks in human history?

No, it's your claim. You provide evidence to support your assertion that the Swedish judiciary has been influenced politically to bring Julian Assange to trial.

 

[Here_to_learn]

you can provide evidence that the prosecution is politically independent, we don't have to rely on absence of evidence to come to a conclusion. So far you have not done this, and as far as I have seen, neither has anyone else.

Thank you for that well formulated response. Really, it was quite helpful to see your line of reasoning. Other than that, I’m afraid I have nothing to add to the discussion. Let’s see if you can persuade anyone to take your opinions into account. Lastly, I hope that you will be able to see the value of the other side of the argument.

 

[Watanabe]

Irrelevant. Julian Assange stands accused of serious sexual assault crimes in Sweden, GWB is not.

While GWB may not have been legally accused of sexual assault, he could have been properly marginalized for starting a useless war based on lies.
Funny enough, he was not.

That is not within the purview of the independent Swedish judiciary. Its independence prevents it from ruling on things like this.

But it is well within the power of the fair Swedish Government, which is the Government of the country where the Swedish Judiciary system happens to operate.
Funny enough, the Government only issued a mild statement

I'm not going to comment on whether the war was necessary or not or whether gathering incorrect intelligence is a crime under international law in this thread because it would once again derail it - I'm happy to discuss that in a separate thread (or one of the many threads where this has been discussed ad-nauseam).

In terms of the Swedish judiciary, Julian Assange has been accused of, and charged with sexual assault and so Sweden has pursued the standard process to bring him to trial.

Exactly.
While Bush, who started an unnecessary war which the Swedish Government itself deemed as illegal, was just mildly criticized.
And nothing else

No, it's your claim. You provide evidence to support your assertion that the Swedish judiciary has been influenced politically to bring Julian Assange to trial.

No, it's your claim. You provide evidence to support your assertion that the Swedish judiciary is independent

 

[Watanabe]

I did and it highlighted some excellent reasons why the US wouldn't want to prosecute Julian Assange because he (Assange) was a passive recipient of information instead of coaching Bradley Manning into providing it.

Assuming that the US Government is interested in playing fair.
Prove it

 

[The Don]

No, it's your claim. You provide evidence to support
your assertion that the Swedish judiciary is independent

No, the initial claim was yours, that the Swedish justice system has yielded to political pressure from the US to charge Julian Assange.

You've been provided with evidence to show that, judged objectively, the Swedish justice system is unbiased and free from political influence. You have been provided with examples where the Swedish justice system has refused to yield to foreign pressure. You have chosen to discard this evidence because the case is not *exactly* the same as Julian Assange's. I'm pretty sure that you have made your own mind up and it cannot be changed but I hope this thread has helped to inform people like me who felt that the Assange prosecution had a whiff of conspiracy about it.

I've certainly now been convinced that the prosecution is legitimate and that the Swedish justice system has been scrupulous in following the correct procedures.

 

[dafydd]

While GWB may not have been legally accused of sexual assault, he could have been properly marginalized for starting a useless war

I thought it was a useful war. The law is not based on personal opinions.