Julian Assange's lawyers have been given two weeks to consider their next move after the Australian Wikileaks founder's appeal against extradition to Sweden was rejected by the UK's Supreme Court.

Last night the seven-judge panel ruled five to two that Mr Assange's extradition appeal be dismissed and he be extradited to be questioned over sexual assault allegations.

The panel decided Sweden's prosecutor was a judicial authority and therefore the European arrest warrant issued for Mr Assange was valid.

Mr Assange's lawyer Dinah Rose asked for 14 days to consider whether to apply to reopen the case on the grounds that the judgment referred to material that was not mentioned during the last hearing in February.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-31/julian-assange-lawyers-consider-application-to-reopen-case/4043286

Of course one can only speculate on the validity of the claims by the Swedes...

But one could actually organise the said trial on UK soil — after a court room would be declared "Swedish" for the purpose and length of time of the trial...

"Witnesses" (there are only two accusers, no witnesses nor foresics), prosecutors and Swedish judges could be accomodated on UK soil. If this would not be agreable to the Swedish court, this would prove that the case is el crappo — specifically designed to extradite Assange away from a "safety" position... Such "overseas" court, although rare, have existed in history... especially in "international" company court cases...

For Julian, one of the main argument is that he has received OVERT death threats from the US including SOME from US senators and leading political figures. He should be protected. No matter how the media and our politicians see Assange, Assange has performed — and is stil performing under very difficult circumstances — a necessary purge of the lying crap fed to us by the establishment.

For example in the video recording of the shooting of innocents from a chopper, tells us directly how the culture of the US army is very much like that of bad cartoons — and/or violent video games — including the infantile language — except the pain and the deaths inflicted are real.

WE NEEDED TO KNOW. THANK YOU, JULIAN. 

 

Fresh from his stunning victory in dispatching two helpless Syrian diplomats, Labor’s latterday Metternich, Senator Bob Carr, today turned the full force of his awful hyperbole on Australia’s hapless number one public enemy, Julian Assange.

“No Australian has received more consular support in a comparable period than Mr Assange,” boomed Bob.

Of course, anyone harbouring doubts about the efficacy of Bob’s claims might be tempted to place more store in the behaviour of our Prime Minister who, on the one hand, found time to make a reassuring personal telephone call to an Australian teenager charged with drug offences in Indonesia & then recently made a public plea to the Indonesian government to agree to send convicted drug smuggler Schappelle Corby home whilst, on the other, going out of her way to publicly accuse Assange of having acted illegally, even though the man hasn’t even been charged with an offence.

But then, I suppose if we were to rely on the experiences of David Hicks or Mamdouh Habib as the ‘benchmark’, perhaps Bob’s flamboyant claim just might be true?

 

 

THE United States has denied it is secretly preparing legal action against Julian Assange as supporters of the WikiLeaks founder explore fresh legal moves to stop his extradition to Sweden to face questioning over rape allegations.
The US ambassador to Australia, Jeffrey Bleich, yesterday rejected as ''an invention'' claims that Washington was preparing a warrant for the arrest of Mr Assange over WikiLeaks' role in publishing thousands of secret US diplomatic cables last year.
''There is no such thing as a secret warrant. Period. They don't exist,'' Mr Bleich said.

On Wednesday, Mr Assange lost a British Supreme Court appeal that sought to prevent him being sent to Sweden.

 

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/us-denies-assange-secret-warrant-20120531-1zkug.html#ixzz1wUi2di2N

 

what about "not-so-secret" warrants? Or what about the president's "hit list"?