Wikileaks Founder Arrested in London
PrintJulian Assange, the man behind the controversial whisteblower site Wikileaks, was arrested Tuesday on a Swedish warrant, according to a CNN report.
Popular opinion held that it was only a matter of time before Assange would have to answer for making available classified documents and other sensitive information, but that's not what this arrest is about, at least on the surface. Instead, Swedish authorities issued a warrant for Assange in order to chat with him about sex-crime allegations that have nothing to do with Wikileaks.
Assange turned himself in and will appear in court later today. He will then have a chance to respond to the warrant, after which time the court will have around 21 days to decide whether or not to extradite him. If it does, Assange could appeal the decision.
The sexual assault allegations include one count of rape, two counts of sexual molestation, and one count of unlawful coercion, all of which Assange chalks up to a smear campaign.
Image Credit: Reuters
More like this
85
Comments
Comments are closed on this article
RagingMercenary
January 23, 2011 at 11:58am
Most of the people here are missing the point in this debate. First of all, the arrests had nothing to do with anything related to or pertaining to the activities of Wikileaks. The only controversy in this article is the validity of the charges brought against Assange in regards to the two women he had intimate relations with.
I want to make sure that everyone knows exactly why Wikileaks is, for the most part, immune to both US and international law; the general consensus is that Wikileaks did not play an active role in extracting or stealing the classified documents that it leaked. It was merely the publisher of said documents. In US law, this is protected under the First Amendment as well as under the precedents of New York Times v. U. S., Landmark Communications v. Virginia, and Bartnicki v. Vopper. In the region of international law, the same protection applies. So in either legal system, they are not guilty of anything assuming that they did not have a hand in acquiring the information.
That brings us to the issue of where they did get the information from. These are called sources. In the case of the Pentagon Papers it was Daniel Ellsberg and in the case of this most recent "document dump" it is alleged to be Pfc. Bradley Manning. Those are the people who can possibly be charged with "spying" or "espionage" as referenced by others in this line.
But what really worries me in reading many of these comments are the extremes that some people are willing to go, or let others go to, in order to protect the reputation of their country. I've seen people say that they would condone water-boarding or that they would like to have torn Assange apart (and not in the figurative sense). What kind of convoluted ethnocentrism is being espoused here? Are you really saying that you would rather have someone be tortured or killed so that you can keep the sacred image of your country on that pedestal? If my government was engaging in illegal activities, I would want to know about it! It seems to me that some Americans will do anything to reassure themselves that their country is the greatest, no matter what evidence points to the contrary.
blkpanthr
February 14, 2011 at 4:16pm
Yes. There are no lengths i would not go to protect my family, country, and service members.
RagingMercenary
February 15, 2011 at 12:41pm
I think that you have a grave misunderstanding of what Wikileaks has released as well as an incomplete comprehension for the implications of your statement "There are no lengths i would not go to protect my family, country, and service members." First of all, I think that we can all agree that it is morally permissable to do just about anything to protect your family if they are under immediate harm. The same might be said for many other people as well, depending on how anthropic you are. Don't you agree? Yet, this is where the misunderstanding occurs; I think that you believe that the documents Wikileaks are releasing are causing immediate threats to your loved ones or service men. The papers Wikileaks released were composed mainly of diplomatic cables and documents concerning military operations in the Iraq War from between 2003 and 2009. Diplomatic cables aren't really a cause for worry (besides a few bruised egos) and I think that you know that military reports from as distant as 2003 and as recent as 2009 will pose little or no threat to current military operations. Did you think that the documents that Wikileaks was releasing were of current events, that they might give away the "moves" of our armed forces to terrorist? The only implications of these documents are the possible indictments of service members who violated official conduct and/or committed war crimes. Would you really go to any length to protect these criminals who are tarnishing the reputation of the United States armed forces?
Carlidan
February 14, 2011 at 6:31pm
I have no qualms with that. :) But there has to a middle ground somewhere.
Arclite
December 09, 2010 at 2:44am
1. SEX CRIMES: If Julian violated Swedish law for sex crimes he perpetrated there, and he is found guilty, then he needs to pay the penalty. Period, the end. Just like anyone else.
2. DOCUMENTS: It is NOT a crime in the USA to publish secret documents. Let me say that again, IT IS NOT A CRIME IN THE USA TO PUBLISH SECRET DOCUMENTS. That's all wikileaks does: publish. Not hack. Not steal. Publish. Just like a newspaper. If wikileaks violated any law, then every single newspaper and news org in the USA that published the Iraq docs, the Afghan docs, the diplomatic cables, the Pentagon papers, or showed the Apache video must also be prosecuted under the same law as they all did the same thing. However, no such law exists. In fact, there is a law that explicitly protects such activity: the First Amendment of the US Constitution: Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; This law also happens to be the highest law in the land and any first year judge find in favor of the plantiff in any such case.
You may not agree that such documents should be published. You can say so, that's your right. You can even say he should go to jail or be shot. That's your right. But when you say such things, you are showing yourself to be ignorant of the laws of this country, and you disrespect the principles on which it was founded and for which our countrymen died.
blkpanthr
December 09, 2010 at 6:12am
clearly someone hasnt read the rest of these comments or hould not have made such an ignorant comment.
Arclite
December 09, 2010 at 5:06pm
1. Cooketh Said,
Transparency in government is good, but certain information has to stay classified until a certain time. Put this guy in jail.
Put him in jail? What law did he break?
2. Carlidan said (responding to you discussing punishment for publishing the docs)
Well I'm not disagreeing with you blkpanthr that Assange should go to jail. What I'm saying he should be tried for it. If what he did was treason, put him to a trial for it.
He can't be punished for treason. He's not American. Only citizens can by tried for treason by definition.
3. You yourself said,
He published sensitive documents, and will be held accountable as a foreign national.
Two things. First, he's not American and did nothing wrong in the US, so any criminal action would lack jurisdiction. Second, if he was somehow tried in the US, all applicable US laws would apply. Foreigners commit crimes in the US all the time. Two things can happen to them: 1. they are deported, 2. They are punished under American law then deported.
4. You also said,
There is a large difference between being a party to the information and flapping your gums, and stealing it (yes, he stole it, it was classified, he knew he had no right to it, and WILLFULLY disregarded this), and then releasing it under the crazy misguided notion that you are doing the world a favor..
Again, Julian and Wikileaks did not steal the info. That would be a crime. He PUBLISHED it. Just like a newspaper. That is NOT a crime. If he goes to jail for publishing this info, then any journalist can go to jail, if the gov't deems the info "illegal" to print. Then we are living in a communist/Stalinist state where the government controls the press. Is that what you want? That's what you are arguing for.
blkpanthr
December 09, 2010 at 7:53pm
1. Espionage, NOT treason. Military tribunals are not subject to the American constitution.
2. see above.
3. The fact that it didnt haapen on Ameriacn soil has no bearing on the fact that he comitted a crime angainst the US.
4. Sheild laws are AMERICAN laws. Hes not american, so hes not procection in any way shape or form.
Anyway you slice it he knowinly recieved stolen goods in the form of state secrets and released them. Thats collution brother. And espionage.
Again, someone who doesnt understand global politics or law.
He will be punished. Count on it.
It dusturbs me how many people in my own country believe everyone in the world is subject to our sovereign rights.
Must be the same whining liberals who cried about Gitmo. War is hell. Get used to it.
"Oh, he blew up Iraqi children, and Allied servicembers, but you have no right to hold his head underwater till he talks."
Fuck you. If a couple of swirlies gets me the intel i need to stop more innocents dieing, ill take it. Woulnt be the dirst time. Ill do whatever it takes to keep my familiy safe.
Carlidan
December 09, 2010 at 8:05pm
That interroragation method doesn't work and it had proven unreliable when intel is given though torcher. And once upon at time majority of republicans who served in the military believed torcher was wrong. Yes talking to you Mc Cain. But it is surprising how a politician caves in their moral values because of politicial pressures. And most liberals have problems of Gitmo is that most of the them housed there aren't even terrorist. We don't have problems housing terrorist in Gitmo, but that is a long term solution. That shit cost alot of money to keep em there.
usucdik
December 09, 2010 at 4:16am
But... they aren't in the US. So fuck 'em! Yeah! Now I'm gonna go drink beer and shoot a gun into the air!
EthicSlave
December 09, 2010 at 4:52am
If you have done any research on the topic you would automaticaly assume the guys innocence
As from what I have researched (minor law technicalities), he was charged becuase he did not use protection. Apparently the 2 females got togethor and decided to file against (said persons) jointly, after 1 of them had already been dismissed once in court.
That being said, if he violated a law by doing so. (and this is the big part of it) Did the 2 women allow him to not use protection or did he refuse to do so. This is the stipulation of most of these charges.
I wont even go into the to parts where they had further friendly contact with their so called rapist after said rape... (holding a party in the guys honor after he raped you?)
blkpanthr
December 09, 2010 at 7:57pm
what has this to do with espionage?
i could care less about his sexual deprvity.
these alligations were in the sweedish authorities hand long before the leaks.
EthicSlave
December 09, 2010 at 2:17am
Pertaining American Rights
"Boy everyone in this country is running around yammering about their fucking rights. “I have a right, you have no right, we have a right.”
Folks I hate to spoil your fun, but… there’s no such thing as rights. They’re imaginary. We made ‘em up. Like the boogie man. Like Three Little Pigs, Pinocio, Mother Goose, shit like that. Rights are an idea. They’re just imaginary. They’re a cute idea. Cute. But that’s all. Cute…and fictional. But if you think you do have rights, let me ask you this, “where do they come from?” People say, “They come from God. They’re God given rights.” Awww fuck, here we go again…here we go again.
The God excuse, the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument, “It came from God.” Anything we can’t describe must have come from God. Personally folks, I believe that if your rights came from God, he would’ve given you the right for some food every day, and he would’ve given you the right to a roof over your head. GOD would’ve been looking out for ya. You know that.
He wouldn’t have been worried making sure you have a gun so you can get drunk on Sunday night and kill your girlfriend’s parents.
But let’s say it’s true. Let’s say that God gave us these rights. Why would he give us a certain number of rights?
The Bill of Rights of this country has 10 stipulations. OK…10 rights. And apparently God was doing sloppy work that week, because we’ve had to ammend the bill of rights an additional 17 times. So God forgot a couple of things, like…SLAVERY. Just fuckin’ slipped his mind.
But let’s say…let’s say God gave us the original 10. He gave the british 13. The british Bill of Rights has 13 stipulations. The Germans have 29, the Belgians have 25, the Sweedish have only 6, and some people in the world have no rights at all. What kind of a fuckin’ god damn god given deal is that!?…NO RIGHTS AT ALL!? Why would God give different people in different countries a different numbers of different rights? Boredom? Amusement? Bad arithmetic? Do we find out at long last after all this time that God is weak in math skills? Doesn’t sound like divine planning to me. Sounds more like human planning . Sounds more like one group trying to control another group. In other words…business as usual in America.
Now, if you think you do have rights, I have one last assignment for ya. Next time you’re at the computer get on the Internet, go to Wikipedia. When you get to Wikipedia, in the search field for Wikipedia, i want to type in, “Japanese-Americans 1942″ and you’ll find out all about your precious fucking rights. Alright. You know about it.
In 1942 there were 110,000 Japanese-American citizens, in good standing, law abiding people, who were thrown into internment camps simply because their parents were born in the wrong country. That’s all they did wrong. They had no right to a lawyer, no right to a fair trial, no right to a jury of their peers, no right to due process of any kind. The only right they had was…right this way! Into the internment camps.
Just when these American citizens needed their rights the most…their government took them away. and rights aren’t rights if someone can take em away. They’re priveledges. That’s all we’ve ever had in this country is a bill of TEMPORARY priviledges; and if you read the news, even badly, you know the list get’s shorter, and shorter, and shorter.
Yeup, sooner or later the people in this country are going to realize the government doesn’t give a fuck about them. the government doesn’t care about you, or your children, or your rights, or your welfare or your safety. it simply doesn’t give a fuck about you. It’s interested in it’s own power. That’s the only thing…keeping it, and expanding wherever possible.
Personally when it comes to rights, I think one of two things is true: either we have unlimited rights, or we have no rights at all."
- George Carlin 1937 - 2008
Carlidan
December 09, 2010 at 3:01am
He so makes so much sense. LOL. Nice post
[reason for edit] added much
Danthrax66
December 07, 2010 at 10:41pm
Things we should know:
http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/2010/12/wikileaks_texas_company_helped.php
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,733153,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/05/wikileaks-cables-saudi-terrorist-funding
http://torrentfreak.com/wikileaks-cable-shows-us-involvement-in-swedish-anti-piracy-efforts-101207/
HOLY SHIT I AGREE WITH GLEN BECK ON ONE THING AND ONLY ONE THING: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQUYfSo1i2E&feature=player_embedded#!
Oh and how about the irony of this http://i.imgur.com/TxXML.png
Only 1000 of the 250,000 are currently released. YOU CAN'T STOP IT EVEN IF HE DIES
http://wikileaks.razor1911.com/
The Internet has spoken Wikileaks shall remain and Julian Assange shall be heralded as a hero.
Kelly M
March 04, 2011 at 4:39am
What? No incriminating evidence against Israel? Guess they're the good guys, huh?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUbTe50UUgM
http://theinfounderground.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5367
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/10/13/mohammed-abdullah-gul-a-retrospective-analysis-of-the-wikileaks-crisis/
http://www.projectworldawareness.com/2010/08/something-stinks-about-wikileaks-i-agree-have-felt-so-for-a-long-time/
Cooketh
December 07, 2010 at 1:09pm
Transparency in government is good, but certain information has to stay classified until a certain time. Put this guy in jail.
Danthrax66
December 07, 2010 at 10:14pm
What information? These people aren't Dictators they are citizens like you and I the idea that because they got elected means that for some reason what they do around the world as a representation of us should be kept secret is bullshit. Also the crime he is wanted for in Sweden has a maximum fine of $750.
Keith E. Whisman
December 08, 2010 at 1:11pm
Your a dumbass. You really think we would last very long without national security and secrecy? How do you think trade works? Do you think national security should be open for all to see? Have you ever played poker? You don't tell your opponents what's in your hand. Damn your a dumn ass.
Your a member of the rebel alliance and a traitor take him away!
Danthrax66
December 08, 2010 at 7:20pm
Yeah I'm a dumbass and you are the one falling for the lies that the cables somehow hurt our diplomacy. The cables hurt our corrupt politicians they aren't hurting our trade or our country as a whole it is hurting the corrupt fucks that are in charge and that need to leave or have already left it is exposing untold numbers of crimes committed by or covered up by the U.S. government so you can got to hell if you think this hurts us as a country. You fucking idiot, wake up this information is coming out and nothing you say can stop it, and as a matter of fact Assange didn;t steal the information he published it just like the NY Times and the Guardian.
blkpanthr
December 08, 2010 at 9:41pm
as has been stateted elswehere, he is not an american, and is not protected by our laws, his reporting is irrelevent. He published sensitive documents, and will be held accountable as a foreign national.
Carlidan
December 07, 2010 at 10:57am
Enough said. Just because we apologize for wrong doings does not make us weak. It makes us stronger because we can then understand that we must learn for our mistakes and acknowlege them.
P.S. If you think Julian should be shot for treason. Then Scooter Libby should be shot for treason too. What fair is fair. He outed an active CIA agent. He shouldn't have gotten a trial nor his sentence commuted but the President. He should have been shot where he stood.
And liberals do thank all veterans for their service but that doesn't mean we have to agree with everything you say.
blkpanthr
December 07, 2010 at 12:20pm
While Scooter is a retard, and agree he should have done some jail time, There is a large difference between being a party to the information and flapping your gums, and stealing it (yes, he stole it, it was classified, he knew he had no right to it, and WILLFULLY disregarded this), and then releasing it under the crazy misguided notion that you are doing the world a favor..
Lets be real here, the only favor he THOUGHT he was doing was to himself. Now hes villified. He clearly hasnt learned his lesson, as he just keeps digging a bigger hole. Eventually, someone is going to bury him in it.
compro01
December 08, 2010 at 8:26am
it was classified, he knew he had no right to it, and WILLFULLY disregarded this
And if you think that is at all relevant to this, please go read the decision in New York Times Co. v. United States and correct yourself.
blkpanthr
December 08, 2010 at 1:11pm
That case is irrelevant, as he is not an american citizen, and WikiLeaks is not an accredited news agency and is therefore not protected under the American Constitution, Bill of Rights, SHIELD laws, or the American Legal System at all.
Carlidan
December 07, 2010 at 7:43pm
Well I'm not disagreeing with you blkpanthr that Assange should go to jail. What I'm saying he should be tried for it. If what he did was treason, put him to a trial for it. And the only reason say "if" is because he wasn't convicted yet. You have no argurement with me that what he did was treasonous. :)
[Reason for editing] Was should have been wasn't.
blkpanthr
December 08, 2010 at 1:28pm
While i agree with you in principal, dont forget that due process is an american right. The right to a trial by your peers is part of the bill of rights, it is NOT a right of foreign nationals (except if they were comitted on american soil).
Keith E. Whisman
December 08, 2010 at 1:40pm
I laugh when I hear people from around the world recite the US Constitution and Bill of Rights as applying to them. Like the illegal Aliens think the constitution protects them as well but they forget that it only protects citizens. Once you are a US citizen you are entitled to all the rights. You can't come visit Arizona from Great Briton and just go buy a gun at a gun shop and carry it on your hip. You are not a citizen and do not therefor have the right to bare/bear arms.
Carlidan
December 08, 2010 at 8:39pm
Actually illegal aliens do have some rights. I think they are called human rights. Not for sure. And their are probably other laws we've guaranteed to illegal aliens. You are right that laws written in US Constitution or Bill of rights are for U.S. citizens.
blkpanthr
December 08, 2010 at 9:47pm
i think youve missed the point here. Of course, because they are on american soil. they do have some rights.
Human rights are subjective. tThey deepend on sentiment at the time. They are much different than they were 20 years ago, and even 40 years ago. They change depending on the world at large.
Carlidan
December 08, 2010 at 10:01pm
[Quote by blkpanthr] Of course, because they are on american soil. they do have some rights. That is what I'm trying to say to Keith. He said just because they are illegals they don't have rights in our nation. Which is quite the contrary. [Quote by blkpanthr]: Human rights are subjective You are probably right. Which I believe is wrong. Humans rights shouldn't change depending on how we feel today.
blkpanthr
December 08, 2010 at 10:54pm
His example is wholy correct however, if u are not a citizen, u do not have right to bear arms. Illegal or not.
Nor do they technically have any rights all all as keith has pointed out. It by our grace we allow them any.
Again, that fact that you think they should not be subjective may change in 20 years. So that statement in itself is subjective.
The Geneva Convention was an attempt my AMERICA to standarize human rights. How many countries outside of the Super Powers, and the Great Powers abide by it? iraq? Afgasistan? Dafour? Bosnia? Chechnya? Georgia? (for those of u that dont follow world politics, they all performed some kind of ethnic cleasing/mass murders)
Kelly M
March 04, 2011 at 5:11am
You were remiss in not including Apartheid Israel in your list of nations involved in ethnic cleansing. In case you missed it...
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynWjYHP91gA&feature=related
Kelly M
March 04, 2011 at 5:14am
The United States Promotes Israeli Genocide Against the Palestinians
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11721
Carlidan
December 09, 2010 at 3:09am
Yes his examples are right. :( Darn.
Well we can agree that we can hope that one day all nations will abide to certain human rights. Even though that's a really FARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR fetch reality.
EA18Growler
December 07, 2010 at 10:51am
I really don't understand why Americans are such hypocrites...And the worst is that they think in their own stupid little minds that they will get away with it...
blkpanthr
December 07, 2010 at 11:05am
everyone is a hypocryte to some extent. Hypocracy is a fact of life. Since we are the worlds most powerful nation, we get the finger pointed at us more often.
growler
December 08, 2010 at 12:41pm
Who ever has the fastest computer is the most powerful nation...China's computer Tianhe-1A is twice as fast as the US computer Jaguar. The bad thing about this is China used computers made in the USA...but the USA does not have the technology to build such a computer.. The USA is trying to steal their secrets to build a faster computer, so until the USA gets their hands on those secret chinese documents, we won't have a supercomputer....
blkpanthr
December 08, 2010 at 1:16pm
hows is this even relevent?
Global power structure is determined by Hegemony. Gained mostly (but not exclusively) by the following criteria:
1) Financial Market Capitalization (and by corrilary size and liquidity of curency market)
2) Population wealth index per capita
3) size/strength of standing armed forces.
4) Alied nations
what do computers have to do with it?
and btw: China's super compuer is made up of Xeons (intel - american company) and Nvidia compute cores (also an american compnay) Its not much of a secret...lol
blkpanthr
December 07, 2010 at 9:45am
Its only a matter of time before some numskull tries to blow this meatstick's head off. And good riddance i say. At the very least, he needs a good solid ass-beating.
Keith E. Whisman
December 07, 2010 at 9:59am
Well if he's in a London Jail under sex crimes with a juvenile charges then it is likely he will get his ass pounded and then he'll probably get beat up too.
Cache
December 07, 2010 at 8:40am
I might consider it a smear campaign, but the charges are from women in Sweden. Given that 95% of Americans probably couldn't find Sweden on a map, I tend to discount that it is a smear.
The fact that he has a 'doomsday' file that he will release 'if anything happens to him' pretty much makes him no better than a terrorist in my book. A crook is a crook--and this guy is just out for his own lulz.
Keith E. Whisman
December 08, 2010 at 1:18pm
I can! I can! Isn't Sweden somewhere near France and Germany?
Danthrax66
December 07, 2010 at 10:16pm
The crime he is convicted of is sex without a condom not rape it is some weird ass swedish law. Not an international law Interpol shouldn't have been involved.
Derek Fredette
December 07, 2010 at 8:46am
I'd not call this dude a terrorist, nor would I think that the charges against him are legit, but I agree that he's just another bum if he has some suspicious files only to be released in the worst case. For him to make such a threat that he has it and to have conditions for the release of it, in my opinion, simply undercuts the credibility of his wikileaks effort. If he respected his own ideals, all the information he has should be automaticlly released irrespective of his own interest - that is if he were acting from the moral high ground.
Who knows in the end? Dunno.
Keith E. Whisman
December 07, 2010 at 9:13am
If they were to extradite him, what can we expect from the weakest administration since Carter? A slap on the wrist maybe. Remember liberals believe that the US is the bad guy, that is why Obama went around the world apologizing for US policy. Obama is pretty close to the same mentality as this Assange character. Although I would like to tear this guy apart and let him die agonizingly slow, the liberals are pretty much siding with this guy. Notice how the liberal news media pretty much refuses to call this guy a criminal. I'd bet that Obama will make sure this dude doesn't do anymore time then say 3years at the most if he is even extradited. Remember how liberals work. The USS Cole was attacked and Osama claimed responsibility, he also claimed responsibility for the first World Trade Center bombing as well and when Clinton had the chance to extradite Osama Bin Laden, Bill Clinton refused. Bill Clinton, A Liberal, believed in Osama Bin Ladens' work. As a liberal Bill Clinton, like Obama, knows that the US is evil and somehow at fault. That is why they (the liberals) are so quick the leave the country if a Republican is elected. There simply is no patriotism. In fact liberals believe patriotism for America is evil, yet they support the patriotism of our enemies. The liberals hate Christianity and Judaism and bar it from schools and all aspects of public life but when it comes to Islam, the religion of our current enemies, well it's welcome everywhere, hell they built prayer centers at the airports around the countries.
So no, I don't think anything will be done to this guy if he were extradited. Obama, how about you prove me wrong.
Connect with MaximumPC
Featured Content
The gang discusses the GTX 690, Trinity, Ivy Bridge, Amazon, big-box stores, MMOs,...
This month's issue
Feature
Build a PC On Any Budget
Feature
Cloud Services Showdown
How-To
Encrypt Your External Drive
Build It
Upgrade an X58 Rig
Most Commented Articles
Latest Max PC Tweets
- maximumpc: Original RickRoll Video Returns to YouTube After 24-Hour Copyright Hiatus http://t.co/MaH9Sxyy2 days 10 hours ago
- maximumpc: Corsair has decided not to go forward with its $78 million IPO, citing weak equity market conditions http://t.co/A5a4DAzj2 days 10 hours ago
- maximumpc: Want to work at Maximum PC? Our Online Managing Editor, Alex, is moving away, so we need a new one. http://t.co/9Z7JCh0E4 days 8 hours ago
