This is not Swedish Fish.

[Warren Stupidity]

Considering he made his name with the biggest leak of secret government documents in history, you might imagine there would be at least be some residual concern for Julian Assange among those trading in the freedom of information business. But the virulence of British media hostility towards the WikiLeaks founder is now unrelenting.

This is a man, after all, who has yet to be charged, let alone convicted, of anything. But as far as the bulk of the press is concerned, Assange is nothing but a "monstrous narcissist", a bail-jumping "sex pest" and an exhibitionist maniac. After Ecuador granted him political asylum and Assange delivered a "tirade" from its London embassy's balcony, fire was turned on the country's progressive president, Rafael Correa, ludicrously branded a corrupt "dictator" with an "iron grip" on a benighted land.

The ostensible reason for this venom is of course Assange's attempt to resist extradition to Sweden (and onward extradition to the US) over sexual assault allegations – including from newspapers whose record on covering rape and violence against women is shaky, to put it politely. But as the row over his embassy refuge has escalated into a major diplomatic stand-off, with the whole of South America piling in behind Ecuador, such posturing looks increasingly specious.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/21/why-us-is-out-to-get-assange

[Agnosticsherbet]

1. This article is wrong as an international warrant for his arrest has been made...

in accordance with Swedish Law. That is why they sought to extradite him.
Legal myths about the Assange extradition

[struggle4progress]

2. Seumas Milne is happy to quote "a former Stockholm prosecutor" when he says

the extradition is "unreasonable, unfair and disproportionate" -- but his link goes to the "Expert Report of Sven-Erik Alhem" associated with the lawsuit heard in the Magistrate's Court

Alhem did, in fact, so testify before that Court -- but he also testified before the Court, that there was no way Assange could be re-extradited to the US from Sweden

The point, that Milne uses Alhem to argue, was heard by the UK courts, and Assange lost that argument

But on the re-extradition, of Assange to the US from Sweden, we should note that Assange did NOT argue that point in court and has therefore forfeited it

And we should also note that Milne quotes Alhem only when Alhem agrees with him: he pays no attention at all to Alhem's testimony, that Assange could not possibly be re-extradited to the US from Sweden