Credo Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Unless the US government has told either the Swedish or UK governments that it is planning to extradite Assange, there is no extradition request. How do you keep an indictment sealed and expect another country to act on it. For all the blustering and talk that happened in the US after Wikileaks it is very likely to not add up to a conviction on anything very serious. Espionage? I doubt it. The information he disseminated was given out freely. There was no intent to conceal it from friends or enemies. Everyone knew instantly what everyone else knew. The US lost face and one would expect a lot of righteous indignation, then they need to sit down and plug the holes in their information system. Putting Assange on the stand could prove embarrassing. And lets not forget the US government would be trying a non-US citizen who is from an allied country for a VERY serious crime. The diplomatic ramifications are large. Assange has a fair amount of support from people. People in Australia and people around the world see him as the underdog, the mistreated (and possibly persecuted) defender of something. He is, to them, a sort of Robin Hood. It's best to make his life a little inconvenient, but a trial in which big, nasty, monolithic governments vs. little saintly defender of free speech would be a bad idea. I am not a advocate for Assange, by the way. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Some off-topic posts and replies have been deleted. No need to go back over his legal situation in Sweden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softgeorge Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Perhaps the British government will be forced to use the famed SAS to extract this wanted criminal from his hideout in the Ecuadorian embassy. Wouldn't using the military against another countries embassy be an act of war? UK govt threatens to enter Ecuador embassy At a news conference in Quito on Wednesday, Mr Patino said a letter from the UK government was delivered through a British embassy official. "Today we received from the United Kingdom an express threat, in writing, that they might storm our Embassy in London if we don't hand over Julian Assange," he said. "Ecuador rejects in the most emphatic terms the explicit threat of the British official communication." 'Hostile act' He said such a threat was "improper of a democratic, civilised and rule abiding country "This a clear breach of international law and the protocols set out in the Vienna Convention. Ecuador foreign minister Ricardo Patino also said a decision on the 41-year-old's bid for political asylum had been made and would be revealed on Thursday. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-19259623 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Perhaps the British government will be forced to use the famed SAS to extract this wanted criminal from his hideout in the Ecuadorian embassy. Wouldn't using the military against another countries embassy be an act of war? This lifted from another article on Assange's request: Should Assange win asylum in Ecuador, he would still have to get from the embassy, which is considered Ecuadorean soil, to an airport to board a flight to South America without being arrested by British police. British diplomatic officials in the U.S. did not immediately respond to an ABC News request for comment. According to the BBC, a Foreign Office spokesman said the U.K. government is "committed to reaching a mutually acceptable solution." The British government has also reportedly reminded the Ecuadorean government that under law it can revoke the diplomatic immunity of an embassy, which would enable officials to enter the building and apprehend Assange. http://news.yahoo.co...topstories.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softgeorge Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 (edited) Perhaps the British government will be forced to use the famed SAS to extract this wanted criminal from his hideout in the Ecuadorian embassy. Wouldn't using the military against another countries embassy be an act of war? This lifted from another article on Assange's request: Should Assange win asylum in Ecuador, he would still have to get from the embassy, which is considered Ecuadorean soil, to an airport to board a flight to South America without being arrested by British police. British diplomatic officials in the U.S. did not immediately respond to an ABC News request for comment. According to the BBC, a Foreign Office spokesman said the U.K. government is "committed to reaching a mutually acceptable solution." The British government has also reportedly reminded the Ecuadorean government that under law it can revoke the diplomatic immunity of an embassy, which would enable officials to enter the building and apprehend Assange. http://news.yahoo.co...topstories.html Somehow I do not think that England will jump in to quick to revoke the diplomatic immunity of the Embassy over a guy from Australia who is wanted by Sweden. Is a single Aussie who failed to abide by his bail conditions worth severing Foreign relations and trade. Who has more to lose given the position of the Euro and E.U at the moment? Personally I think that England is calling a bluff because it knows that the decision on asylum is imminent and appears it will be in favour of Assange. Ecuador will announce its decision on Assange's asylum request on Thursday at 7 a.m. (1200 GMT). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ecuador's leader Correa is a self-declared enemy of "corrupt" media and U.S. "imperialism", and apparently hit it off with Assange during a TV interview the Australian did with him in May. http://www.bbc.co.uk.../world-19259623 Edited August 16, 2012 by softgeorge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 This lifted from another article on Assange's request: Should Assange win asylum in Ecuador, he would still have to get from the embassy, which is considered Ecuadorean soil, to an airport to board a flight to South America without being arrested by British police. British diplomatic officials in the U.S. did not immediately respond to an ABC News request for comment. According to the BBC, a Foreign Office spokesman said the U.K. government is "committed to reaching a mutually acceptable solution." The British government has also reportedly reminded the Ecuadorean government that under law it can revoke the diplomatic immunity of an embassy, which would enable officials to enter the building and apprehend Assange. http://news.yahoo.co...topstories.html Somehow I do not think that England will jump in to quick to revoke the diplomatic immunity of the Embassy over a guy from Australia who is wanted by Sweden. Is a single Aussie who failed to abide by his bail conditions worth severing Foreign relations and trade. Who has more to lose given the position of the Euro and E.U at the moment? Personally I think that England is calling a bluff because it knows that the decision on asylum is imminent and appears it will be in favour of Assange. Ecuador will announce its decision on Assange's asylum request on Thursday at 7 a.m. (1200 GMT). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ecuador's leader Correa is a self-declared enemy of "corrupt" media and U.S. "imperialism", and apparently hit it off with Assange during a TV interview the Australian did with him in May. http://www.bbc.co.uk.../world-19259623 Perhaps you are right but here are a couple of articles about the possible Embassy action: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Britain warns Ecuador it could enter embassy to get Assange By Eduardo Garcia and Maria Golovnina QUITO/LONDON | Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:27pm EDT (Reuters) - Britain on Wednesday warned Ecuador that it could raid its London embassy if Quito does not hand over WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who has been taking refuge at the mission since mid-June. In Quito, the Ecuadorean government said that any such action would be considered a violation of its sovereignty a "hostile and intolerable act." "Under British law we can give them a weeks' notice before entering the premises and the embassy will no longer have diplomatic protection," a Foreign Office spokesman said. "But that decision has not yet been taken. We are not going to do this overnight. We want to stress that we want a diplomatically agreeable solution." http://www.reuters.c...RE87E16N2012081 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Perhaps the Ecuadorian President is even considering this potential problem: U.S. trade benefits for Ecuador seen at risk in Assange case By Doug Palmer WASHINGTON | Tue Aug 14, 2012 4:53pm EDT (Reuters) - An possible decision this week by Ecuador to grant political asylum to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange would put long-time U.S. trade benefits for the Andean country at risk, U.S. business leaders and analysts said. "It's not a move destined to win many new friends in Washington," said Eric Farnsworth, vice president at the Council of Americas, a group representing U.S. companies that do business in the Western Hemisphere. Ecuador's President Rafael Correa said on Monday he hoped to announce his decision on Assange's asylum request by the end of the week. Assange has been taking refuge in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London since June 19 to avoid extradition to Sweden, where he is wanted for questioning on sex crime allegations. http://www.reuters.c...E87D0Z320120814 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 They are hiding a wanted criminal. To be a criminal 1st you need to be "CONVICTED" of a criminal offence., They are not hiding him as they openly admit he is there. They do not deny it. They are protecting and assessing a person who may possibly be facing persecution or death. He has already been convicted in his native Australia of a felony. Right now he is a FUGITIVE from British justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softgeorge Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 They are hiding a wanted criminal. To be a criminal 1st you need to be "CONVICTED" of a criminal offence., They are not hiding him as they openly admit he is there. They do not deny it. They are protecting and assessing a person who may possibly be facing persecution or death. He has already been convicted in his native Australia of a felony. Right now he is a FUGITIVE from British justice. Are you refering to the 30 charges of hacking, where he was fined $2,000 AUD and released on a 12 month good behaviour bond? The majority of charges accuring as a juvenile (under 18 yrs old) and heard in a children's court. I believe the judge said it was just juveile inquisitiveness. A good behaviour bond in Australia means that if you are not charged with any other offences during the period of the bond then, if a conviction was recorded the conviction is sqashed (struck out). Also any prior juvenile offences can not be admitted in an adult court. Julian Assange has no convictions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softgeorge Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 (edited) This lifted from another article on Assange's request: Should Assange win asylum in Ecuador, he would still have to get from the embassy, which is considered Ecuadorean soil, to an airport to board a flight to South America without being arrested by British police. British diplomatic officials in the U.S. did not immediately respond to an ABC News request for comment. According to the BBC, a Foreign Office spokesman said the U.K. government is "committed to reaching a mutually acceptable solution." The British government has also reportedly reminded the Ecuadorean government that under law it can revoke the diplomatic immunity of an embassy, which would enable officials to enter the building and apprehend Assange. http://news.yahoo.co...topstories.html Somehow I do not think that England will jump in to quick to revoke the diplomatic immunity of the Embassy over a guy from Australia who is wanted by Sweden. Is a single Aussie who failed to abide by his bail conditions worth severing Foreign relations and trade. Who has more to lose given the position of the Euro and E.U at the moment? Personally I think that England is calling a bluff because it knows that the decision on asylum is imminent and appears it will be in favour of Assange. Ecuador will announce its decision on Assange's asylum request on Thursday at 7 a.m. (1200 GMT). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ecuador's leader Correa is a self-declared enemy of "corrupt" media and U.S. "imperialism", and apparently hit it off with Assange during a TV interview the Australian did with him in May. http://www.bbc.co.uk.../world-19259623 Perhaps you are right but here are a couple of articles about the possible Embassy action: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Britain warns Ecuador it could enter embassy to get Assange By Eduardo Garcia and Maria Golovnina QUITO/LONDON | Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:27pm EDT (Reuters) - Britain on Wednesday warned Ecuador that it could raid its London embassy if Quito does not hand over WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who has been taking refuge at the mission since mid-June. In Quito, the Ecuadorean government said that any such action would be considered a violation of its sovereignty a "hostile and intolerable act." "Under British law we can give them a weeks' notice before entering the premises and the embassy will no longer have diplomatic protection," a Foreign Office spokesman said. "But that decision has not yet been taken. We are not going to do this overnight. We want to stress that we want a diplomatically agreeable solution." http://www.reuters.c...RE87E16N2012081 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Perhaps the Ecuadorian President is even considering this potential problem: U.S. trade benefits for Ecuador seen at risk in Assange case By Doug Palmer WASHINGTON | Tue Aug 14, 2012 4:53pm EDT (Reuters) - An possible decision this week by Ecuador to grant political asylum to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange would put long-time U.S. trade benefits for the Andean country at risk, U.S. business leaders and analysts said. "It's not a move destined to win many new friends in Washington," said Eric Farnsworth, vice president at the Council of Americas, a group representing U.S. companies that do business in the Western Hemisphere. Ecuador's President Rafael Correa said on Monday he hoped to announce his decision on Assange's asylum request by the end of the week. Assange has been taking refuge in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London since June 19 to avoid extradition to Sweden, where he is wanted for questioning on sex crime allegations. http://www.reuters.c...E87D0Z320120814 Why would America be upset if he was granted asylum especially as many say that the U.S is not interested in him and the rumours that the U.S want to put him on trial are a myth. Edited August 16, 2012 by softgeorge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Somehow I do not think that England will jump in to quick to revoke the diplomatic immunity of the Embassy over a guy from Australia who is wanted by Sweden. Is a single Aussie who failed to abide by his bail conditions worth severing Foreign relations and trade. Who has more to lose given the position of the Euro and E.U at the moment? Personally I think that England is calling a bluff because it knows that the decision on asylum is imminent and appears it will be in favour of Assange. Ecuador will announce its decision on Assange's asylum request on Thursday at 7 a.m. (1200 GMT). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ecuador's leader Correa is a self-declared enemy of "corrupt" media and U.S. "imperialism", and apparently hit it off with Assange during a TV interview the Australian did with him in May. http://www.bbc.co.uk.../world-19259623 Perhaps you are right but here are a couple of articles about the possible Embassy action: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Britain warns Ecuador it could enter embassy to get Assange By Eduardo Garcia and Maria Golovnina QUITO/LONDON | Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:27pm EDT (Reuters) - Britain on Wednesday warned Ecuador that it could raid its London embassy if Quito does not hand over WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who has been taking refuge at the mission since mid-June. In Quito, the Ecuadorean government said that any such action would be considered a violation of its sovereignty a "hostile and intolerable act." "Under British law we can give them a weeks' notice before entering the premises and the embassy will no longer have diplomatic protection," a Foreign Office spokesman said. "But that decision has not yet been taken. We are not going to do this overnight. We want to stress that we want a diplomatically agreeable solution." http://www.reuters.c...RE87E16N2012081 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Perhaps the Ecuadorian President is even considering this potential problem: U.S. trade benefits for Ecuador seen at risk in Assange case By Doug Palmer WASHINGTON | Tue Aug 14, 2012 4:53pm EDT (Reuters) - An possible decision this week by Ecuador to grant political asylum to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange would put long-time U.S. trade benefits for the Andean country at risk, U.S. business leaders and analysts said. "It's not a move destined to win many new friends in Washington," said Eric Farnsworth, vice president at the Council of Americas, a group representing U.S. companies that do business in the Western Hemisphere. Ecuador's President Rafael Correa said on Monday he hoped to announce his decision on Assange's asylum request by the end of the week. Assange has been taking refuge in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London since June 19 to avoid extradition to Sweden, where he is wanted for questioning on sex crime allegations. http://www.reuters.c...E87D0Z320120814 Why would America be upset if he was granted asylum especially as many say that the U.S is not interested in him and the rumours that the U.S want to put him on trial are a myth. Did you read the article? Ecuador and the US do not see eye to eye on many fronts. Assange might simply be the straw that breaks the camels back. From your post..."rumours that the U.S want to put him on trial are a myth." Rumors are always myths, until proven otherwise. Then they become facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billd766 Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 If Ecuador granted his asylum and also a diplomatic passport, he could travel to the airport in an embassy vehicle, still technically part of the Ecuadorean embassy which is considered as Ecuadorean territory as any embassy in a foreign country is. He could get to an Ecuadorean aircraft and most probably travel as part of the diplomatic bag which ALL countries are to recognise as inviolable and get to Quito that way. "Under British law we can give them a weeks' notice before entering the premises and the embassy will no longer have diplomatic protection," a Foreign Office spokesman said. "But that decision has not yet been taken. We are not going to do this overnight. We want to stress that we want a diplomatically agreeable solution." Should the UK (my country) actually do this the it may be legal in theory in the UK but it would open a whole bag of worms internationally as there would be a precedent set and then no embasyy in any country would have diplomatic protection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chooka Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 If Ecuador granted his asylum and also a diplomatic passport, he could travel to the airport in an embassy vehicle, still technically part of the Ecuadorean embassy which is considered as Ecuadorean territory as any embassy in a foreign country is. He could get to an Ecuadorean aircraft and most probably travel as part of the diplomatic bag which ALL countries are to recognise as inviolable and get to Quito that way. "Under British law we can give them a weeks' notice before entering the premises and the embassy will no longer have diplomatic protection," a Foreign Office spokesman said. "But that decision has not yet been taken. We are not going to do this overnight. We want to stress that we want a diplomatically agreeable solution." Should the UK (my country) actually do this the it may be legal in theory in the UK but it would open a whole bag of worms internationally as there would be a precedent set and then no embasyy in any country would have diplomatic protection. I agree if the U.K revoked the diplomatic protection it could very well open up a can of worms. Having said tho haven't other nations used this power before, expelling embassy officials and even the emabassies themselves. Normally reserved for rogue states and the like. (Syrian ambassadors of late) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koheesti Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 I don't think there would be much of a problem granting him instant citizenship and under the United Nations rules there would be a period where he has provisional status until the Gen assembly meets. Sounds like another daydream. Whatever happens from now on, Julian Assange is still an example to others of what happens when you distribute top secret documents on the internet. At best, he is going to be stuck in one building that he can not leave for quite some time Maybe they'll find him beneath an airport runway in Ecuador 50 years from now like they found Che in Bolivia. You wish! Untrue! I wouldn't want to wait that long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chooka Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 a Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koheesti Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 If Ecuador granted his asylum and also a diplomatic passport, he could travel to the airport in an embassy vehicle, I believe the UK still needs to accept the diplomatic credentials. Otherwise, all any dissident in China (or elsewhere) needs to do is go to a friendly embassy, get issued a diplomatic passport and leave. I was watching the BBC this morning and I thought I heard them say that Assange was facing charges in the United States. Is this now true? Or did they goof? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Perhaps the British government will be forced to use the famed SAS to extract this wanted criminal from his hideout in the Ecuadorian embassy. Wouldn't using the military against another countries embassy be an act of war? Under UK law the British Government can inform the Government of Ecuador, that the building is no longer recognised as a diplomatic building. At that moment the building become UK sovereign territory, and therefore subject to the laws of the land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softgeorge Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Perhaps the British government will be forced to use the famed SAS to extract this wanted criminal from his hideout in the Ecuadorian embassy. Wouldn't using the military against another countries embassy be an act of war? Under UK law the British Government can inform the Government of Ecuador, that the building is no longer recognised as a diplomatic building. At that moment the building become UK sovereign territory, and therefore subject to the laws of the land. I believe it is after 7 days of notice being given Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses G. Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 (edited) Today is as good a day as any for giving notice. Edited August 16, 2012 by Ulysses G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses G. Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 (edited) It is not up to Assange when he is questioned about the sex charges that he is accused of. It is up to the Swedish authorities. Edited August 16, 2012 by Ulysses G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Actually, he is evading sex charges in Sweden. That is why he jumped bail. he had sex without condom,the girls said with condom ok,without condom not ok,not really sex charges,also the swedish prosecutors where invited to London to talk to him,Equador embassy also invited them to the embassy,something smells very fishy.I hope british government does not make the mistake to storm the embassy,if they do,then no embassy in the world is safe anymore.by the way he is only accused,and the swedes want to talk to him only,and then decide,they could have easy talked to him while he was in prison,but they refused to do so "not really sex charges" In Sweden they are. All of your other points have been discussed many times in one of the many threads we have had on Assange. Same in the UK I believe, once the girl cries stop. It's non consentual sex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Of course the Ecuadorians could just offer to hand him over to the Swedes. If the guy is a rapist (legally) then the Ecuadorians are acting immorally. IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takatukaland Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Perhaps the British government will be forced to use the famed SAS to extract this wanted criminal from his hideout in the Ecuadorian embassy. Wouldn't using the military against another countries embassy be an act of war? Consular Premises Act 1987.It allows the UK to revoke the diplomatic status of an embassy on UK soil, which in this case would potentially allow police to enter the building to arrest Mr Assange for breaching the terms of his bail. from bbc anyway if they do that,then the next time a british citizen is hiding in some embassy like teheran,bejing,or mogadischo,then u can be sure british embassy is not a safe place anymore,all that shit for unprotected sex act? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midas Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Of course the Ecuadorians could just offer to hand him over to the Swedes. If the guy is a rapist (legally) then the Ecuadorians are acting immorally. IMHO. okay and if in the end there is no case can he be handed back to Ecuador rather than USA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 (edited) Of course the Ecuadorians could just offer to hand him over to the Swedes. If the guy is a rapist (legally) then the Ecuadorians are acting immorally. IMHO. okay and if in the end there is no case can he be handed back to Ecuador rather than USA? That's up to the Swedes, where he is wanted. FWIW if this guy was a Brit, the Americans could have just turned up at is home due to the one sided treaty, if the Americans wanted him Edited August 16, 2012 by Mosha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses G. Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Yes, unless at that time he is wanted for charges elsewhere and Sweden honors the request to extradite him and, of course, the British might want to prosecute him for his crimes in England as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kartman Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Asylum granted and now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meand Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 It sounds like they just granted him asylum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softgeorge Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Asylum Has Been Granted. Congratulations Julian. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midas Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Asylum Has Been Granted. Congratulations Julian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naam Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Asylum granted and now? now they will bomb the embassy and then storm it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts