Ecuador President Says No Decision Made On Assange Asylum Request

[JanKlaasen]

Interesting article about how it all started and some insight.

Translated by google :

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=nl&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dewereldmorgen.be%2Fartikels%2F2012%2F08%2F16%2Fpolitiek-asiel-ecuador-voor-assange-wat-er-gaande

Original source :http://www.dewereldmorgen.be/artikels/2012/08/16/politiek-asiel-ecuador-voor-assange-wat-er-gaande

[chooka]

Australia 'preparing' for Assange extradition to US

By AFP | AFP – 23 hours ago

Australia confirmed Saturday that its diplomatic post in Washington had been preparing for Julian Assange's possible extradition to the US but played it down as "contingency planning".

Trade Minister Craig Emerson said the Australian embassy in Washington had been "getting prepared for the possibility of an extradition" but stressed that there was nothing unusual in diplomats bracing for all eventualities.

"The embassy is doing its job, just to be in a position to advise the government if it believed that an extradition effort was imminent.

http://my.news.yahoo...-084522706.html

I guess people will be saying this is a conspiracy theory instigated by the Australian Government who have fallen out with the U.S.

Edited August 19, 2012 by chooka

[ozziebloke]

So in that case why do you think they are treating Bradley Manning the way they are?

of course it's revenge!

at the end of the day if you and many others that think like you do are correct

all Sweden has to do is give an assurance he will not be passed on to USA?

What is so difficult about giving that? And if they don't he would have to be a fool

to give Sweden any benefit of the doubt particularly based on all the shenanigans surrounding

the arrest warrant procedure after he returned to the UK again which the four Corners documentary

highlighted.

I dont think any country would concede to the demands of someone that country has a warrant for, As for Bradley Manning he was a member of the armed forces of the US and he was the one who took the documents and passed them onto a third party. ( And that is not judging Bradley Manning)

[ozziebloke]

Australia 'preparing' for Assange extradition to US

By AFP | AFP – 23 hours ago

Australia confirmed Saturday that its diplomatic post in Washington had been preparing for Julian Assange's possible extradition to the US but played it down as "contingency planning".

Trade Minister Craig Emerson said the Australian embassy in Washington had been "getting prepared for the possibility of an extradition" but stressed that there was nothing unusual in diplomats bracing for all eventualities.

"The embassy is doing its job, just to be in a position to advise the government if it believed that an extradition effort was imminent.

http://my.news.yahoo...-084522706.html

I guess people will be saying this is a conspiracy theory instigated by the Australian Government who have fallen out with the U.S.

I have seen the news all day including the interview with Trade Minister Craig Emerson and he stated he or the government have no knowledge of any extradition attempts by the US government. and all reports are stating it's still hearsay

[Ulysses G.]

Anything is possible. Someday mankind might be able to travel in time. However, no one said that Assange would never be arrested eventually that I can remember. If he travels to the U.S. there is a good possibility that he might be.

Edited August 19, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[midas]

So in that case why do you think they are treating Bradley Manning the way they are?

of course it's revenge!

at the end of the day if you and many others that think like you do are correct

all Sweden has to do is give an assurance he will not be passed on to USA?

What is so difficult about giving that? And if they don't he would have to be a fool

to give Sweden any benefit of the doubt particularly based on all the shenanigans surrounding

the arrest warrant procedure after he returned to the UK again which the four Corners documentary

highlighted.

I dont think any country would concede to the demands of someone that country has a warrant for, As for Bradley Manning he was a member of the armed forces of the US and he was the one who took the documents and passed them onto a third party. ( And that is not judging Bradley Manning)

the BBC are currently reporting that after his live address at 1 PM GMT

he will volunteer himself to the police to be arrested.

but of course now the world will be watching what happens next and we will soon see

whether your theory was correct or not

[Scott]

Off-topic posts deleted. This thread is not about Bradley Manning and references to him out of context have been deleted.

Julian Assange has been granted asylum. Apparently the Ecuadorian gov't had reason to believe the threat of persecution was credible.

[ozziebloke]

So in that case why do you think they are treating Bradley Manning the way they are?

of course it's revenge!

at the end of the day if you and many others that think like you do are correct

all Sweden has to do is give an assurance he will not be passed on to USA?

What is so difficult about giving that? And if they don't he would have to be a fool

to give Sweden any benefit of the doubt particularly based on all the shenanigans surrounding

the arrest warrant procedure after he returned to the UK again which the four Corners documentary

highlighted.

I dont think any country would concede to the demands of someone that country has a warrant for, As for Bradley Manning he was a member of the armed forces of the US and he was the one who took the documents and passed them onto a third party. ( And that is not judging Bradley Manning)

the BBC are currently reporting that after his live address at 1 PM GMT

he will volunteer himself to the police to be arrested.

but of course now the world will be watching what happens next and we will soon see

whether your theory was correct or not

I have always wondered why he has never returned to Australia where his mother and his children are before 2010 when he knew that by his words the US authorities were after him? wouldn't Australia be the safest place for him ?

[Scott]

I have always wondered why he didn't go back to Australia as well. Perhaps events got ahead of him and he was simply unable to get back. I don't think he planned on being detained in the UK, otherwise, he could have made his way to a country that was unlikely to arrest him or return him to Sweden.

Perhaps someone is better versed on the extradition situation, however, I don't think the UK can extradite him to the US (if there was an extradition request), without him either going to Sweden first or his case being dropped by Sweden. Sweden has first dibbs on him.

[ozziebloke]

I just watched Julian Assnge Address, And it was a good speach about Wikileaks and his Supporters outside the embassy were very vocal of support for him. but he did not say anything about the charges against him in Sweden ? He has made a choice to imprison himself in the Equadore Embassy instead of confronting the charges alledged against himself

Edited August 19, 2012 by ozziebloke

[Ulysses G.]

I don't think the UK can extradite him to the US (if there was an extradition request), without him either going to Sweden first or his case being dropped by Sweden. Sweden has first dibbs on him.

Correct, but if there were really the conspiracy that some allege, Sweden would have simply dropped the charges and he would have been extradited from the UK.

[Credo]

If a Grand Jury was convened and decided to charge Assange with something, can the government decide to ignore the Grand Jury and not charge him?

[JanKlaasen]

I don't think the UK can extradite him to the US (if there was an extradition request), without him either going to Sweden first or his case being dropped by Sweden. Sweden has first dibbs on him.

Correct, but if there were really the conspiracy that some allege, Sweden would have simply dropped the charges and he would have been extradited from the UK.

If you both had read the link I posted, you should have known that the UK could extradite him but also why they decided not to.

7. Can Britain not equally well decide to extradite to the U.S.?

Of course. But exactly that's where the shoe pinches. The legal requirements for extradition in Britain are more extensive and demanding than in Sweden. The UK may be the closest ally of the U.S. is much slavish subservience blame. Their imperial past still weighs heavily in the British legal system.

First and foremost, the U.S. legal basis for an extradition request to Britain publicly defend in a British court, where both Assange itself as world opinion have access to the arguments that the U.S. has. All this while Assange still could speak with the media.

Moreover, Britain fundamentally extradites nobody for crimes for which capital punishment is possible. The country has already proven that this condition seriously, by including the extradition of Northern Irish terrorists to the USA to refuse.

The British extradition procedures also impose strict requirements on the treatment of the extradited person in the country. Thus, the procedure except that the U.S. intends to apply (as voted by President Bush and exacerbated by Obama and is already being used against Bradley Manning) could even be refused by Great Britain.

The British government, can miss such a statement of their judiciary like a toothache. It would be particularly embarrassing for the U.S. Indeed, just as their closest ally in judicial procedures in the U.S. would condemn.

In Sweden, all of this no. First and foremost, the Swedish legislation that Assange after extradition would be detained and held incommunicado. Moreover, one in Sweden an extradition request behind closed doors. That would be the U.S. is much better. The procedure for extradition is also much faster and without special conditions.

In other words, assuming that Assange after several days interrogation behind closed doors in Sweden would be completely exonerated of sexual offenses, Sweden may continue to hold him incommunicado meantime, meanwhile, as an application for extradition is made. In Sweden, Assange finally be extradited without the media and the public would know what is going on.

Edit for better translation

Edited August 19, 2012 by JanKlaasen

[Credo]

What a bunch of poppycock.

Neither Sweden nor the UK is going to allow Assange, or anyone else for that matter, be sent to the US if they face the death penalty. European countries simply do not do it. The US would have to remove the death penalty from the table or he would not be sent.

As for the baloney about the UK extradition being sooooo difficult, how on earth did they agree to extradite him to Sweden for questioning in that case?

[marstons]

of goodness sake stop exaggerating as you always do. He has not been charged with anything

and considering there is absolutely no evidence and considering also the two women

boasted about their " conquest " of Julian Assange I doubt if there ever will be charges

If that were true,why would he jump bail to avoid being questioned about the sex charges and why would he be hiding out from the authorities?

This is pretty comical really. He claims to be innocent, but is doing his best to get stuck in one building for the rest of his life to avoid getting sent to Sweden which is known for having one of the mosy honest, most independent justice systems in the whole world.

Think any right minded person can work out he is trying to avoid the USA and its rogue agencies. Maybe he has a fear of grassy Knoll's Edited August 19, 2012 by marstons

[philw]

Why should The USA help out this guy in any way? He put a lot of people all over the world in danger. He is accused of sex crimes and he jumped bail to avoid being questioned about it. Why tell him anything that might give him any peace of mind? He is stuck in a tiny, windowless room, on a blow-up mattress eating cold English take-out food. Leave him in limbo. He is getting just what he deserves.

He published a lot of information that shows how the "real politic" works.

That information is hugely beneficial to those who want to and are able ( a sad minority probably ), to make impartial, educated assessments about America and how their system works.

The information he helped to disclose is a public service.

If a few grunts are exposed because of it, so be it.

But they weren't.

The people exposed are the duplicitous American diplomats and their masters.

Well done Assange and well done Ecuador.

[chuckd]

Midas:

I'm going to take a great leap here and assume you have never served in the US Military. If you had you would know you give up virtually all your civil rights when you are sworn in and do not really regain them until you are discharged and no longer on active duty.

While you are serving the country you are under the UCMJ (Universal Code of Military Justice). It is entirely separate and apart from the normal US justice system with different legal rules.

Please educate yourself about the UCMJ and quit beating your chest about Manning. He is being treated no better or worse than any military personnel would be that might be suspected of his alleged crimes.

He will face a military courts martial and not a civilian court and will face a federal prison if convicted.

I am not disputing that one bit but equally if you don't believe they also want to give Assange

the same treatment under the provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act 2012

you would have to be extremely naive?

Midas:

IF Assange is ever indicted by a Federal Grand Jury an arrest warrant will be issued by a Federal judge. IF he has an arrest warrant hanging over his head, Federal authorities will go after him regardless of where he is. If he is in a country that has an extradition treaty with the US, a Request for Extradition will be issued by the State Department and handed to whichever host country he is located in.

His host country at that time must decide if the Extradition Request is legal and all the "I's" are dotted and the "T's" are crossed. If all is in order they may then decide to honor the request or reject it.

Your concern about the Patriot Act is nonsense. If he is in a Federal Court, he will have the same protection everybody in the US has, with the exception of active duty military, and that is the US Constitution.

You can put your fears to rest. We did away with rope parties many years ago.

[rubl]

My apologies if this has been posted already. Sorry, but on a weekend I might decide not to keep up with whatever gets written here.

2012-08-18

"US intends to chase Assange, cables show

AUSTRALIAN diplomats have no doubt the United States is intent on pursuing Julian Assange, Foreign Affairs and Trade Department documents obtained by the Herald show.

This is at odds with comments by the Foreign Affairs Minister, Bob Carr, who has dismissed suggestions the US plans to eventually extradite Assange on charges arising from WikiLeaks obtaining leaked US military and diplomatic documents.

The Australian embassy in Washington has been tracking a US espionage investigation targeting the WikiLeaks publisher for more than 18 months."

Follow the link for the complete article

http://www.smh.com.a...0817-24e1l.html

[philw]

Midas:

I'm going to take a great leap here and assume you have never served in the US Military. If you had you would know you give up virtually all your civil rights when you are sworn in and do not really regain them until you are discharged and no longer on active duty.

While you are serving the country you are under the UCMJ (Universal Code of Military Justice). It is entirely separate and apart from the normal US justice system with different legal rules.

Please educate yourself about the UCMJ and quit beating your chest about Manning. He is being treated no better or worse than any military personnel would be that might be suspected of his alleged crimes.

He will face a military courts martial and not a civilian court and will face a federal prison if convicted.

I am not disputing that one bit but equally if you don't believe they also want to give Assange

the same treatment under the provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act 2012

you would have to be extremely naive?

Midas:

IF Assange is ever indicted by a Federal Grand Jury an arrest warrant will be issued by a Federal judge. IF he has an arrest warrant hanging over his head, Federal authorities will go after him regardless of where he is. If he is in a country that has an extradition treaty with the US, a Request for Extradition will be issued by the State Department and handed to whichever host country he is located in.

His host country at that time must decide if the Extradition Request is legal and all the "I's" are dotted and the "T's" are crossed. If all is in order they may then decide to honor the request or reject it.

Your concern about the Patriot Act is nonsense. If he is in a Federal Court, he will have the same protection everybody in the US has, with the exception of active duty military, and that is the US Constitution.

You can put your fears to rest. We did away with rope parties many years ago.

Given American history, and current performance, it's a bit difficult to have faith in your last sentence.

Especially given the postscript you choose.

"If liberals were as smart as they claim to be, they would be conservatives. "

You might not like it, but there is another world out there, bigger than America.

[koheesti]

You can put your fears to rest. We did away with rope parties many years ago.

Given American history, and current performance, it's a bit difficult to have faith in your last sentence.

Especially given the postscript you choose.

"If liberals were as smart as they claim to be, they would be conservatives. "

You might not like it, but there is another world out there, bigger than America.

And they don't all agree with you either. There are a lot of people and a lot of countries who would be happy for Assange to meet an early end. And as is often the case, they are waiting for the USA to do it so they can remain blameless.

Edited August 19, 2012 by koheesti

[theslime]

You can put your fears to rest. We did away with rope parties many years ago.

Given American history, and current performance, it's a bit difficult to have faith in your last sentence.

Especially given the postscript you choose.

"If liberals were as smart as they claim to be, they would be conservatives. "

You might not like it, but there is another world out there, bigger than America.

And they don't all agree with you either. There are a lot of people and a lot of countries who would be happy for Assange to meet an early end. And as is often the case, they are waiting for the USA to do it so they can remain blameless.

A lot of people in a lot of countries, where did you read that? I suppose a lot of countries have vested interests in keeping the truth from the people and Julian is one and certainly not the last to stand up to those greedy,murdering vested interests. The world will be a better place when the plebs wake up but I dont think it will happen for many a day.what say you?

[chooka]

You can put your fears to rest. We did away with rope parties many years ago.

Given American history, and current performance, it's a bit difficult to have faith in your last sentence.

Especially given the postscript you choose.

"If liberals were as smart as they claim to be, they would be conservatives. "

You might not like it, but there is another world out there, bigger than America.

And they don't all agree with you either. There are a lot of people and a lot of countries who would be happy for Assange to meet an early end. And as is often the case, they are waiting for the USA to do it so they can remain blameless.

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. If the world is waiting for the USA to carry out the deed then why aren't they showing support? I see that there is a lot of Anti- American Sentiment and support for Julian but I haven't seen opposite. 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. If the entire population of the U.S was against Assange that still would not be a lot on the world population stage. I haven't heard of any other country in the world that want's to get thier hands on him for wikileaks and one country is not a lot. As the Australian Government have said previously what he did was moraly wrong by publically shaming the U.S but he hasn't broken any laws pertaining to Australia.

Edited August 19, 2012 by chooka

[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.au/2012/07/18/australians-unsure-on-assange-govt-support/

[chuckd]

I am not disputing that one bit but equally if you don't believe they also want to give Assange

the same treatment under the provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act 2012

you would have to be extremely naive?

Midas:

IF Assange is ever indicted by a Federal Grand Jury an arrest warrant will be issued by a Federal judge. IF he has an arrest warrant hanging over his head, Federal authorities will go after him regardless of where he is. If he is in a country that has an extradition treaty with the US, a Request for Extradition will be issued by the State Department and handed to whichever host country he is located in.

His host country at that time must decide if the Extradition Request is legal and all the "I's" are dotted and the "T's" are crossed. If all is in order they may then decide to honor the request or reject it.

Your concern about the Patriot Act is nonsense. If he is in a Federal Court, he will have the same protection everybody in the US has, with the exception of active duty military, and that is the US Constitution.

You can put your fears to rest. We did away with rope parties many years ago.

Given American history, and current performance, it's a bit difficult to have faith in your last sentence.

Especially given the postscript you choose.

"If liberals were as smart as they claim to be, they would be conservatives. "

You might not like it, but there is another world out there, bigger than America.

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.

[theslime]

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/

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.

[ozziebloke]

Funny how Assange is seeking Assylum with a country that is placing restrictions on increasing media plurality and controling debate in that country

[Scott]

Please stay on the topic, if you want to have a personal conversation with/about other posters, use the PM function.

[ozziebloke]

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/

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.

You cherry picked that poll. (•If he were to run for the Senate, in a half Senate election, there is a very good chance that he could win a seat, especially if he stood in NSW....•On the evidence available in the survey he would probably win the seat from the Greens.) And a report by Business Insider International stated.....If Julian Assange ran for Senate elections in Australia, he stands a chance of winning a seat, according to a new poll.

The poll of 1000 voters was conducted at the end of last month by UMR Research, according to The Sydney Morning Herald. The poll found that 25 percent of respondents would likely vote for him if he ran (although 61 percent said they wouldn’t).

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/poll-25-percent-of-australians-would-vote-for-assange-if-he-ran-for-australian-senate-2012-5#ixzz243JbOhUf

[philw]

I am not disputing that one bit but equally if you don't believe they also want to give Assange

the same treatment under the provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act 2012

you would have to be extremely naive?

Midas:

IF Assange is ever indicted by a Federal Grand Jury an arrest warrant will be issued by a Federal judge. IF he has an arrest warrant hanging over his head, Federal authorities will go after him regardless of where he is. If he is in a country that has an extradition treaty with the US, a Request for Extradition will be issued by the State Department and handed to whichever host country he is located in.

His host country at that time must decide if the Extradition Request is legal and all the "I's" are dotted and the "T's" are crossed. If all is in order they may then decide to honor the request or reject it.

Your concern about the Patriot Act is nonsense. If he is in a Federal Court, he will have the same protection everybody in the US has, with the exception of active duty military, and that is the US Constitution.

You can put your fears to rest. We did away with rope parties many years ago.

Given American history, and current performance, it's a bit difficult to have faith in your last sentence.

Especially given the postscript you choose.

"If liberals were as smart as they claim to be, they would be conservatives. "

You might not like it, but there is another world out there, bigger than America.

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.

[Ulysses G.]

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."

Edited August 20, 2012 by Ulysses G.