Ecuador President Says No Decision Made On Assange Asylum Request

[chooka]

In Australia 73% of the people support Julian and want the Australian Government to do more to keep him out of the hands of the U.S.

I don't know where you got this figure, but I strongly suspect that you just made it up. Australians are unsure about what to do about this embarassing figure.

Essential Media also asked a further question regarding what respondents thought the Australian Government should do, if the US did decide to commence legal proceedings against Assange. 34 percent of those polled said the Australian Government should call for the US to observe due process and offer consular support, which the Australian Government has already publicly done in Assange’s case. The next highest percentage, 24 percent, said that the Australian Government should offer Assange protection from extradition and prosecution.

9 percent said the Australian Government should support US Government attempts to prosecute Assange, while 13 percent said it should do nothing, and a large percentage — 20 percent — said they didn’t know what the Australian Government should do. http://delimiter.com...e-govt-support/

I guess you are not an Aussie and do not reside in Australia. I googled it the same as you did and no I did not make it up. He even has support of Politicians who do not bow to the U.S.

Most Australians back Assange, poll finds

Date August 9, 2012

A majority of Australians believe the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange would not receive a fair trial should he ever be extradited to the United States.

The nationwide poll, conducted by UMR Research, also finds more than half do not believe he should be prosecuted for releasing thousands of leaked diplomatic cables.

Should the Australian government do more to support Julian Assange?

Yes

73% No

23% Not sure

4%

Read more: http://www.theage.co...l#ixzz242lxMAR3

Read more: http://www.theage.co...l#ixzz242iv7PQ1

Edited August 20, 2012 by chooka

[koheesti]

A lot of people in a lot of countries, where did you read that?

What is a lot? Is it the majority of the worlds population? The U.S is the only country upset by wikileaks and the only country that wants him to die a horrendous slow death.

Hilarious...everyday I read how "the rest of the world is against what America does!" on these boards and you guys accept that without reservation even thought "rest of the world is 190+ countries and 6.5 billion people. But as soon as someone writes that a lot of people in the world support something America is rumored to want, NOW you want proof/links/details showing how it could be that 100% of the "rest of the world" does not agree with the USA. Keep in mind that if you find a poll that says a majority support Assange, that does not equate to everyone supporting him. 27% of Australia is still millions of people. Extrapolate that across the globe and you have hundreds of millions against him - if not billions. That, IS "a lot of people around the world".

BTW - where do you get that "The U.S is the only country .... wants him to die a horrendous slow death"? I know where - your imagination. If you only looked at facts, you would see that Assange is all about avoiding rape charges and nothing else. But, please, go ahead and send him another $100 donation if it makes you feel like you are "fighting the power!".

Edited August 20, 2012 by koheesti

[koheesti]

You obviously have access to the internet so why not look it up and tell us the last time anybody was dealt with in the US by a rope party.

Since I have lived and worked outside the US since 1974, I expect my vision of the other world out there is at least equal to your own.

You must still be a liberal.

Ah, a compliment.

Thank you sir, I'm sure you understand the various meanings of the word.

Are any of them good?

[softgeorge]

A lot of people in a lot of countries, where did you read that?

What is a lot? Is it the majority of the worlds population? The U.S is the only country upset by wikileaks and the only country that wants him to die a horrendous slow death.

Hilarious...everyday I read how "the rest of the world is against what America does!" on these boards and you guys accept that without reservation even thought "rest of the world is 190+ countries and 6.5 billion people. But as soon as someone writes that a lot of people in the world support something America is rumored to want, NOW you want proof/links/details showing how it could be that 100% of the "rest of the world" does not agree with the USA. Keep in mind that if you find a poll that says a majority support Assange, that does not equate to everyone supporting him. 27% of Australia is still millions of people. Extrapolate that across the globe and you have hundreds of millions against him - if not billions. That, IS "a lot of people around the world".

BTW - where do you get that "The U.S is the only country .... wants him to die a horrendous slow death"? I know where - your imagination. If you only looked at facts, you would see that Assange is all about avoiding rape charges and nothing else. But, please, go ahead and send him another $100 donation if it makes you feel like you are "fighting the power!".

I think you are the one who has missed something very important in this story. Assange "DID NOT" apply for political Asylum because of allegations (only allegations) of RAPE. Assange applied for political asylum and was granted political asylum because of the fears for his life and welfare at the hands of the U.S (Government) Do some research as to why he applied for Political Asylum and the reason given by Ecuador as to why he was granted Political Asylum. Ecuador at time said, that they granted him political asylum because he may or may not have been involved in sexual misconduct. You have been spoon fed this rubbish and you have repeated enough times that you actually believe it. You may have swallowed the rubbish but others are not as gullible.

[koheesti]

I think you are the one who has missed something very important in this story. Assange "DID NOT" apply for political Asylum because of allegations (only allegations) of RAPE. Assange applied for political asylum and was granted political asylum because of the fears for his life and welfare at the hands of the U.S (Government) Do some research as to why he applied for Political Asylum and the reason given by Ecuador as to why he was granted Political Asylum. Ecuador at time said, that they granted him political asylum because he may or may not have been involved in sexual misconduct. You have been spoon fed this rubbish and you have repeated enough times that you actually believe it. You may have swallowed the rubbish but others are not as gullible.

Sorry, you are the gullible one here. Do you really think Assange could have walked into the Ecuadoran embassy and said, "I need to avoid a double rape charge in Sweden, can you please give me asylum?". Even Ecuador would have had to deny that. BUT, go in saying, "The gringo Americans want to murder me like they did to so many in Latin America simply because I told the truth about how evil they are! Please help me!" and you're guaranteed asylum.

BTW - this is WHY Assange knew Ecuador would be willing to help:

Ecuador has announced it is expelling the US ambassador in Quito.

April 5, 2011,

The move follows the release on Monday by the whistle-blowing website Wikileaks of a US diplomatic cable alleging widespread corruption within the Ecuadorean police force.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...merica-12979967

So, instead of "embarrassing the USA", the cable, like many others like it, embarrassed another country and now Ecuador is getting more revenge. Good luck, I know who I'm betting on to walk away in the end with a win on this one.

Edited August 20, 2012 by koheesti

[Scott]

Asylum can be given by a country to nearly anyone it wishes to give it to.

[Ulysses G.]

I am pretty sure that is koheesti's point.

[ozziebloke]

You cherry picked that poll.

I Googled, "What percentage of Australians support Assange" and this was the first link that I opened - not exactly "cherry picking."

I was replying to the comment by theslime, on Today, 12:31 , said:

You may be correctbut, a UMR poll showed most Aussies would elect Julian to our Senate, so I would think he has a huge amount of support

Edited August 20, 2012 by ozziebloke

[koheesti]

I am pretty sure that is koheesti's point.

Off-topic remark deleted

Nevermind that Assange was a lot safer in Sweden or the UK or anywhere in the European Union rather than a second-tier South American country. The fool Assange is trying to jump out of the frying pan and into the fire. No wonder the US gov't appears to be silent on this issue. It couldn't be going much better for them. Now they won't have to worry about offending long-standing allies UK or Sweden. Instead they can deal with a corrupt banana republic, a place where bad things happen to good (& bad) people all the time. Sorry Julian, you just jumped to the top spot in my 2013 dead pool.

Edited August 20, 2012 by Scott

[Ulysses G.]

In Australia 73% of the people support Julian and want the Australian Government to do more to keep him out of the hands of the U.S.

I don't know where you got this figure, but I strongly suspect that you just made it up. Australians are unsure about what to do about this embarassing figure.

Essential Media also asked a further question regarding what respondents thought the Australian Government should do, if the US did decide to commence legal proceedings against Assange. 34 percent of those polled said the Australian Government should call for the US to observe due process and offer consular support, which the Australian Government has already publicly done in Assange’s case. The next highest percentage, 24 percent, said that the Australian Government should offer Assange protection from extradition and prosecution.

9 percent said the Australian Government should support US Government attempts to prosecute Assange, while 13 percent said it should do nothing, and a large percentage — 20 percent — said they didn’t know what the Australian Government should do. http://delimiter.com...e-govt-support/

I guess you are not an Aussie and do not reside in Australia.

Sorry, but your sources do not support your claim that "73% of the people support Julian and want the Australian Government to do more to keep him out of the hands of the U.S." and my source contradicts your claim. I'm not really sure why you posted them as they are not directly related to what you said originally.

Edited August 20, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

I was replying to the comment by theslime, on Today, 12:31 , said:

Yes, you were. Sorry, I got confused by all the quotes together in one post.

[F1fanatic]

The whole thing is ridiculous IMO.

The Swedish authorities want to QUESTION him. So why don't they send people to the UK to question him, rather than applying for an extradition warranty.

Then, why on earth are the UK's laws so bad that they allow extradition not for charges, but for questioning??

Finally, why won't the Swedish authorities just state publically that they will not allow him to later be extradited to the US?

[Ulysses G.]

The whole thing is ridiculous IMO.

You seem to be questioning the legal system pretty much everywhere. Assange is a bail jumper and a wanted man. Why enforce any laws at all?

Edited August 20, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[F1fanatic]

The whole thing is ridiculous IMO.

You seem to be questioning the legal system pretty much everywhere. Assange is a bail jumper and a wanted man. Why enforce any laws at all?

Not sure why you think I am "questioning the legal system pretty much everywhere"?

But please reply to the points I raised, rather than attacking me personally.

[SuneeTH]

Like Thaksin, Assange is a fugitive on the run.

Both are very very bad men.

[ozziebloke]

F1fanatic

You may be right that Assange 'jumped' purely because the allegations were true. But then again, maybe he knew/believed that they were planning to extradite him to the US, so had a v good reason to move to another country...

Far more interesting to me, is why the Swedish authorities didn't take the far cheaper/more sensible route, of sending a couple of investigators to the UK to question him.

I'm also amazed that the UK will extradite someone to answer questions !

I would say that it depend on the Treaty between the two countries as to wether they could of just sent some investigators and the requirements of the judicial system of each country ?

[koheesti]

Now for some questions about asylum for anyone in the know...

OK, so Assange has been given asylum by Ecuador. Done deal. Now, IF he manages to get on a plane and goes to Ecuador...what then?

Does that mean he has to pretty much stay there forever? Having been granted asylum - does that automatically come with a work permit? A life-time residence permit? Does asylum have an expiration date?

Will the gov't there give him a nice villa to live in? Or hand him the newspaper with real estate ads and tell him to get busy?

What does he do for work? Live comfortably off donations (like I believe he plans to do)?

What if he goes to another country that would extradite him? If he truly fears the US is after him I guess he will apply for Ecuadoran citizenship and stay there?

Edited August 20, 2012 by koheesti

[koheesti]

Go back and read others' posts... You are confusing your hatred with evidence and political expedience.

I would prefer facts to the posts you are referring to.

[F1fanatic]

Go back and read others' posts... You are confusing your hatred with evidence and political expedience.

I would prefer facts to the posts you are referring to.

And that is precisely the point! What facts? If the 'facts' were that substantial, the Swedish government would have charged him - not sought extradition to question him...

[koheesti]

Now for some questions about asylum for anyone in the know...

OK, so Assange has been given asylum by Ecuador. Done deal. Now, IF he manages to get on a plane and goes to Ecuador...what then?

Does that mean he has to pretty much stay there forever? Having been granted asylum - does that automatically come with a work permit? A life-time residence permit? Does asylum have an expiration date?

Will the gov't there give him a nice villa to live in? Or hand him the newspaper with real estate ads and tell him to get busy?

What does he do for work? Live comfortably off donations (like I believe he plans to do)?

What if he goes to another country that would extradite him? If he truly fears the US is after him I guess he will apply for Ecuadoran citizenship and stay there?

to get back to the asylum itself, anyone know what comes next when he gets there?

[chooka]

F1fanatic

You may be right that Assange 'jumped' purely because the allegations were true. But then again, maybe he knew/believed that they were planning to extradite him to the US, so had a v good reason to move to another country...

Far more interesting to me, is why the Swedish authorities didn't take the far cheaper/more sensible route, of sending a couple of investigators to the UK to question him.

I'm also amazed that the UK will extradite someone to answer questions !

I would say that it depend on the Treaty between the two countries as to wether they could of just sent some investigators and the requirements of the judicial system of each country ?

are you aware that the Swedish prosecutors travelled to Serbia earlier this year to interrogate a murder suspect, alleged to have committed murder in Sweden? If they can do it in a murder investigation why couldn't they do it in a case where the two alleged victims in the Assange Case didn't even want to press charges anyway and it is really only the very politically tarnished Swedish prosecutor who has the persisted with this matter?

Authorities do not even have to interview a suspect to charge them them with an offence. I have done it numerous times, a quick trip to court outline your evidence make an oath that you have made all resonable attempts to interview the suspect and a Charge and Warrant in one is issued by the court. The person is officially charged in his absence. I filled the briefs the offender pops his head up and gotch ya. Did it for a guy who took off to Hong Kong (serious assaults Criminal damage) came back into Australia 6 years later and arrested at the airport off to court no interview. convicted and sentenced.

Note if you do not have reasonable evidence then the court will not issue the charge and warrant. If Sweden have reasonable evidence for a charge to be laid then why not take this path and formally charge him.

[chuckd]

What I cannot fathom is all these questions asking other forum members why Sweden doesn't do this or doesn't do that.

How can any of us possibly know what motivates Sweden to take their actions? My crystal ball isn't broken but it is cracked.

If you want to know the answers, contact the Swedish authorities and ask them?

Suffice to say the facts are what they are.

1. Assange is wanted for questioning in Sweden for alleged sexual offenses.

2. Sweden issued an EU arrest warrant for questioning when Assange was in the UK.

3. Sweden submitted a Request for Extradition fro the UK and the request was eventually granted following his appeals.

4. Assange was released on bond, with various rather lenient restrictions, while his various appeals were under review by the UK justice system.

5. Assange violated the terms of his bail when he moved to the basement of the Ecuadorian Embassy and forfeited the 250,000 UK pound bond pledged by various benefactors.

6. Assange applied for and was eventually granted political asylum by the Ecuadorian government.

7. Assange remains to this day in the basement with a sunlamp and a laptop.

Go forth and speculate no more.

Nobody has mentioned it but didn't he look spiffy yesterday with that new tan? No more of that sickly pale white color he is so fond of.

[Scott]

Seventeen posts have been deleted in a minor clean up of the forum. Apparently, some posters do not understand what it means to stay on-topic, although several public notices have been posted.

Suspensions will follow.

[philw]

F1fanatic

You may be right that Assange 'jumped' purely because the allegations were true. But then again, maybe he knew/believed that they were planning to extradite him to the US, so had a v good reason to move to another country...

Far more interesting to me, is why the Swedish authorities didn't take the far cheaper/more sensible route, of sending a couple of investigators to the UK to question him.

I'm also amazed that the UK will extradite someone to answer questions !

I would say that it depend on the Treaty between the two countries as to wether they could of just sent some investigators and the requirements of the judicial system of each country ?

are you aware that the Swedish prosecutors travelled to Serbia earlier this year to interrogate a murder suspect, alleged to have committed murder in Sweden? If they can do it in a murder investigation why couldn't they do it in a case where the two alleged victims in the Assange Case didn't even want to press charges anyway and it is really only the very politically tarnished Swedish prosecutor who has the persisted with this matter?

Authorities do not even have to interview a suspect to charge them them with an offence. I have done it numerous times, a quick trip to court outline your evidence make an oath that you have made all resonable attempts to interview the suspect and a Charge and Warrant in one is issued by the court. The person is officially charged in his absence. I filled the briefs the offender pops his head up and gotch ya. Did it for a guy who took off to Hong Kong (serious assaults Criminal damage) came back into Australia 6 years later and arrested at the airport off to court no interview. convicted and sentenced.

Note if you do not have reasonable evidence then the court will not issue the charge and warrant. If Sweden have reasonable evidence for a charge to be laid then why not take this path and formally charge him.

Very good point with serious implications

[Scott]

Swedish law is maybe not the same as Australian law.

I am personally fed up with all the things the Swedish government should of, could of, would of done.

Stay on the topic.

[ozziebloke]

Should'nt Julian Assange be accountable for his actions just like he insists governments should be accountable for their actions?

[theslime]

Should'nt Julian Assange be accountable for his actions just like he insists governments should be accountable for their actions?

To be sure to be sure. Julian would know he,d be accountable when he first decided to print, aah I,m planning on releasing secret cables from the worlds Premier Super power I wonder if I,ll be held accountable.Or aah I,m planning on releasing secrets from the worlds Numero uno and It should be nae bother.No brainer

[midas]

I think this is quite significant because yesterday just before Julian Assange spoke

from the balcony a British member of Parliament who supports Assange told the media crowd

that international law always overrides domestic law. so if he will appeal to the

International Court of Justice and they ruled in his favour Britain must allow safe passage.

Assange looks to international court

WIKILEAKS founder Julian Assange will appeal to the International Court of Justice if Britain prevents him from going to Ecuador, according to a senior Spanish human rights lawyer.

Baltasar Garzon, who is working on Assange's defence, told Spanish newspaper El Pais that Britain was legally required to allow Assange to leave once he had diplomatic asylum.

"What the United Kingdom must do is apply the diplomatic obligations of the refugee convention and let him leave, giving him safe conduct," he said. "Otherwise, he will go to the International Court of Justice."

http://www.devonporttimes.com.au/news/world/world/general/assange-looks-to-international-court/2651509.aspx

[Scott]

Posts deleted. Some posters are now on suspension.

More will be joining them. Stay on topic and the topic is about his asylum, it is not about his alleged sexual misconduct.

[ozziebloke]

Should'nt Julian Assange be accountable for his actions just like he insists governments should be accountable for their actions?

To be sure to be sure. Julian would know he,d be accountable when he first decided to print, aah I,m planning on releasing secret cables from the worlds Premier Super power I wonder if I,ll be held accountable.Or aah I,m planning on releasing secrets from the worlds Numero uno and It should be nae bother.No brainer

Ok but what about the accusations by the Swedes? Does him being responsilble for the releases of those documents nullify him being responsible for the allegations he has been asked to reply to ?

I wouldn,t think so, but not to fly a couple of detectives over to talk to him seems to be a tad inconvenient and stressful to a few people.

like i said before there could be reasons with the terms of the Treaty between the two countries, Leagal provisons with the two countries, So many reasons. I know in Austarlia the government will not accept other countries without an application and certain criteria to adhere to, So maybe GB and Sweden have similiar laws? I dont know the laws of these countries! just suggesting