Jump to content

Exclusive - Ecuador no longer to intervene with UK for WikiLeaks Assange: foreign minister


webfact

Recommended Posts

Exclusive - Ecuador no longer to intervene with UK for WikiLeaks Assange: foreign minister

By Alexandra Valencia

 

2018-10-24T003643Z_1_LYNXNPEE9N010_RTROPTP_4_ECUADOR-SWEDEN-ASSANGE.JPG

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is seen on the balcony of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, Britain, May 19, 2017. REUTERS/Peter Nicholls

 

QUITO (Reuters) - Ecuador does not plan to intervene with the British government on behalf of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to negotiate a way for him to leave the South American country’s embassy in London, where he has lived under asylum since 2012, Ecuador's foreign minister said on Tuesday.

 

Foreign Minister José Valencia said in an interview with Reuters that Ecuador’s only responsibility was looking after Assange's wellbeing, after the Australian national sued the country over new conditions placed on his asylum in the London embassy.

 

(Reporting by Alexandra Valencia; Writing by Luc Cohen; Editing by Toni Reinhold)

 
reuters_logo.jpg
-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-10-24
Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Assange doesn’t need the Ecuadorian’s to negotiate a way for him to leave their embassy.

 

The door’s where it always has been, he’s free to step out onto the street whenever he wishes.

Or via the trunk of an Embassy car which is what he should have done years ago .

Link to post
Share on other sites

If he walks out the Brits are going to be his 2nd biggest fear, his first will be Putins guys.

"Not to worry Donaldt, we make zis problems go away."

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Assange has screwed himself on this. Thought he would have been astute enough not "to bite the hand that feeds him".  But no he decided to sue the Ecuador government !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bendejo said:

If he walks out the Brits are going to be his 2nd biggest fear, his first will be Putins guys.

"Not to worry Donaldt, we make zis problems go away."

 

 

Perhaps he will try to get to the Saudi Embassy and put his head on a plate for them 🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, inactiveposter said:

Where’s Pamela Anderson riding to his rescue? As for suing Ecuador, isn’t there an adage about biting the hand that feeds you?

I should not think Pamela Anderson is even abreast of the situation 😂

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

What he should have done years ago is abide by the conditions of his release on bail.

Because there is no such thing as an injustice done under a legal, constitutional passed law in any nation. Oops, sorry just reflecting what I have been told by the "law and order" folks in the good old USA.... can someone help me up after "taking a knee" for so long?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What really surprises me is that so many of the posters here, seem to completely support the Government being able to sweep it's dirty secrets under the rug, and operate with complete impunity.

 

I think that point of view would quickly change if the government did something to harm them, or their family.

 

As much as you may not like him personally, he did perform a very important function, of shining the light on massive government wrongdoings, which would have otherwise been unknown.  Unfortunately most leaders in the world lean towards authoritarianism, and believe that they can do whatever they want without consequences. Look at the recent Saudi affair as an example.

 

All of you people who are anti Assange/anti Wikileaks just go on to reinforce these assumptions.

 

Don't you think that the world would be a much better off, if we had complete transparency?

 

Next thing I expect you people will be defending, is Safe Zones in higher education institutes, so that the fragile students can run and hide, so as not to be exposed to hurtful words.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NoBrainer said:

What really surprises me is that so many of the posters here, seem to completely support the Government being able to sweep it's dirty secrets under the rug, and operate with complete impunity.

 

I think that point of view would quickly change if the government did something to harm them, or their family.

 

As much as you may not like him personally, he did perform a very important function, of shining the light on massive government wrongdoings, which would have otherwise been unknown.  Unfortunately most leaders in the world lean towards authoritarianism, and believe that they can do whatever they want without consequences. Look at the recent Saudi affair as an example.

 

All of you people who are anti Assange/anti Wikileaks just go on to reinforce these assumptions.

 

Don't you think that the world would be a much better off, if we had complete transparency?

 

Next thing I expect you people will be defending, is Safe Zones in higher education institutes, so that the fragile students can run and hide, so as not to be exposed to hurtful words.  

Yes, he started of well, but before his 'self chosen exile' seemed more a puppet out to harm others and more out to improve his own position than somebody who wanted to be transparent.

 

I don't think the world would be better of with complete transparency.

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Yes, he started of well, but before his 'self chosen exile' seemed more a puppet out to harm others and more out to improve his own position than somebody who wanted to be transparent.

 

I don't think the world would be better of with complete transparency.

In  some aspects  you  may be  correct yet  no more so than  the subject  of  your reply.

The  world  suffers  most  basically  from the  lack of transparency because   that lack supports so many  agenda  of deceitful controls and advantages  not so simply based on "National" prerogative. 

Sheep to the  slaughter  is a geographical endemic  that the  improbability  of   complete transparency  could eradicate. We  remain  primitives with  increasing  technologies to  aid  and  assist  the  divides ! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rgraham said:

Maybe the Saudis would be willing to assist him.

Sure they could smuggle him out... in a few back packs.:clap2:

 

Do not think there would be such a fuss if they did, certainly quicker than getting an eviction order, and then a possession order, and then the bailiffs...

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, britishrepublican said:

He's a coward. He should face the courts just like the rest of us. At first I had sympathy for him but that ran out a long time ago.

What, face an American court?

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, britishrepublican said:

No. He broke the conditions of his bail that was imposed by the UK courts.

 

Know your facts in future or look stupid, that's my advice to you, my friend.

Deary me!

 

Do you think our government would resist an American extradition request? Believe me TM would drop her knickers to get a trade deal. A head on a plate via DHL would do nicely

 

That was the whole point

 

Such naïvety

 

🙈

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NoBrainer said:

What really surprises me is that so many of the posters here, seem to completely support the Government being able to sweep it's dirty secrets under the rug, and operate with complete impunity.

Most of them were posting about how Assange was their all time hero, and how bad the US government, at the time Wikileaks released the Iraqi papers.

 

But you have to keep in mind that you're dealing with mentally challenged cynics, who only move from their armchair when they are assisted to take a pee, and who's whole life centres around being negative about everything they read.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get it. Even under a "potential" USA jailing he could of at least been able to get out in the sunshine and exercise and chat etc. Probably would have been half way through his non parole period

 

Does he plan to die in the embassy? What other option is there

 

He will not get credit for embassy time so he is just digging a bigger hole

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Grouse said:

What, face an American court?

A British court for "failure to surrender" to his bail, for starters, and if any one requests his extradition then he should be held on remand given previous history of skipping bail, and if not extradited should be deported, and never allowed to return.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Basil B said:

A British court for "failure to surrender" to his bail, for starters, and if any one requests his extradition then he should be held on remand given previous history of skipping bail, and if not extradited should be deported, and never allowed to return.

Exactly. If I was him I'd offer to do the washing up!

Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, janclaes47 said:

Most of them were posting about how Assange was their all time hero, and how bad the US government, at the time Wikileaks released the Iraqi papers.

 

But you have to keep in mind that you're dealing with mentally challenged cynics, who only move from their armchair when they are assisted to take a pee, and who's whole life centres around being negative about everything they read.

Projecting.. again!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...