Ludo*1 Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Michael Moore is wading into this now, it's never good when he comes along. Not the shite Scottish one, the real one (We do this with Ronaldo so I'm doing it with Moore). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 What I can't quite understand is how will he actually be able to get asylum in Ecuador, as in if he is granted asylum, how will he get from their embassy in London to Quito, without being arrested? Helicopter on the roof? Like ICT Chris, I don't really know why Assange's lawyers believe that an extradition to Sweden will put him at risk of being extradited to the US. Can you imagine the political shitstorm that would create? Surely Sweden would want nothing to do with that? I'm surprised that it's taken so long for Ecuador to do something about this, I presumed he would have been out on his ear after a week or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 What I can't quite understand is how will he actually be able to get asylum in Ecuador, as in if he is granted asylum, how will he get from their embassy in London to Quito, without being arrested? Helicopter on the roof? Like ICT Chris, I don't really know why Assange's lawyers believe that an extradition to Sweden will put him at risk of being extradited to the US. Can you imagine the political shitstorm that would create? Surely Sweden would want nothing to do with that? I'm surprised that it's taken so long for Ecuador to do something about this, I presumed he would have been out on his ear after a week or so. Assange has an understanding with Ecuadors el Presidente that he will be looked after. Assange has been getting it right up the US administration and has been making them feel a bit silly for a whilenow and Ecuador also have a bit of recent history at giving the US a single digit salute. So they will no doubt try and look after him as best they can. I have no idea how Assange can get out of the actual building and away to Ecuador itself. He is effectively imprisoned in there anyway just now as he will be knobbled as soon as his foot hits the pavement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 I have no idea how Assange can get out of the actual building and away to Ecuador itself. He is effectively imprisoned in there anyway just now as he will be knobbled as soon as his foot hits the pavement. Could they not just put him in a big crate with oxygen, water and snacks, and ship him out as diplomatic cargo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 According to some people on my Twitter feed Assange is actually wanted for trial not just questioning. I think talk of 'storming' the Ecuadorian Embassy is a bit over the top, I'm sure that the tanks aren't lining up outside. When Noriega took refuge in the Vatican Embassy in 1989 the US played loud music to get him out. Someone get the DVD of the Olympics Closing ceremony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Could they not just put him in a big crate with oxygen, water and snacks, and ship him out as diplomatic cargo? That actually happened in the 1980s at the Nigerian Embassy. A Nigerian dissident was kidnapped and the Embassy staff attempted to send him back to Nigeria in pretty much the manner you describe. It didn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbl Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 You know, if there is no danger of US extradition, then why are the Americans (and us, in our usual role as US puppets) taking such an interest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 You know, if there is no danger of US extradition, then why are the Americans (and us, in our usual role as US puppets) taking such an interest? In what way are the Americans taking an interest? We are taking an interest because Assange was resident here when the extradition request came in from Sweden. The US hasn't tried to have him extradited from the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Sky News reporting that Assange has been granted asylum by Ecuador. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chew Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 In what way are the Americans taking an interest? We are taking an interest because Assange was resident here when the extradition request came in from Sweden. The US hasn't tried to have him extradited from the UK. He made them look like idiots in front of the entire world. It would be naive to think that they didn't want him. The Ecuador government asked the US for a guarantee that Assange wouldn't be extradited from Sweden to the US, they refused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 In what way are the Americans taking an interest? We are taking an interest because Assange was resident here when the extradition request came in from Sweden. The US hasn't tried to have him extradited from the UK. There's rumoured to be a sealed Grand Jury indictment lying around for when the US decide to act. I'd imagine they'd rather see him disgraced as a sex offender in Sweden first, so there would be a lot less fuss than if they tried to do him now. My link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chew Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Also worth noting that Assange and the Ecuador government proposed that if the US & Sweden would guarantee that they would not try and extradite him to the US then he would go to Sweden and face the rape and assault charges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 That actually happened in the 1980s at the Nigerian Embassy. A Nigerian dissident was kidnapped and the Embassy staff attempted to send him back to Nigeria in pretty much the manner you describe. It didn't work. Vaguely remember that. What dictates whether or not they could enter the Embassy? On one hand no probs with the SAS going into the Iranian one, yet they shat it with the Libyan one re Yvonne Fletcher??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 He made them look like idiots in front of the entire world. It would be naive to think that they didn't want him. The Ecuador government asked the US for a guarantee that Assange wouldn't be extradited from Sweden to the US, they refused. Would they give guarantees to any government? Why would the US wait until he was in Sweden, why not just have Assange extradited from the UK, we don't exactly fight like honey badgers to keep people here? There's rumoured to be a sealed Grand Jury indictment lying around for when the US decide to act. I'd imagine they'd rather see him disgraced as a sex offender in Sweden first, so there would be a lot less fuss than if they tried to do him now. Aren't all Grand Jury indictments secret? As above, if the US wanted him extradited why not ask us to do it, we happily send over others. It's not cut and dried that Assange would be convicted of anything, there have been leakers in the past who haven't been convicted. Also, this has nothing to do with the fact that he is wanted in Sweden on legitimate charges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Vaguely remember that. What dictates whether or not they could enter the Embassy? On one hand no probs with the SAS going into the Iranian one, yet they shat it with the Libyan one re Yvonne Fletcher??? According to Wikipedia, they just went and stormed the Iranian embassy without bothering to ask the permission of the IRI. COnsidering the IRI weren't in control of the building I suppose they were justified. With regards to Libya, that was a bit more complicated because the people wanted for the shooting were diplomats. The embassy was closed and they were all expelled from the country, you can't prosecute foreign diplomats. Edit to add: Dikko Affair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Would they give guarantees to any government? Why would the US wait until he was in Sweden, why not just have Assange extradited from the UK, we don't exactly fight like honey badgers to keep people here? Aren't all Grand Jury indictments secret? As above, if the US wanted him extradited why not ask us to do it, we happily send over others. It's not cut and dried that Assange would be convicted of anything, there have been leakers in the past who haven't been convicted. Also, this has nothing to do with the fact that he is wanted in Sweden on legitimate charges. Given what's happened to Bradley Manning, I wouldn't give much for his chances in the US. They didn't have the Homeland Security powers when the Pentagon Papers were leaked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbl Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 It's not cut and dried that Assange would be convicted of anything, there have been leakers in the past who haven't been convicted. Also, this has nothing to do with the fact that he is wanted in Sweden on legitimate charges. Yes. I've heard what he is being charged with. Edited to add, by the way, various American officials have made a number of statements calling for his prosecution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Given what's happened to Bradley Manning, I wouldn't give much for his chances in the US. They didn't have the Homeland Security powers when the Pentagon Papers were leaked. Bradley Manning is being prosecuted in a military court and is accused of actually taking the information. NO-one is suggesting that Assange or anyone from Wikileaks hacked anything, he is effectively a publisher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 According to Wikipedia, they just went and stormed the Iranian embassy without bothering to ask the permission of the IRI. COnsidering the IRI weren't in control of the building I suppose they were justified. With regards to Libya, that was a bit more complicated because the people wanted for the shooting were diplomats. The embassy was closed and they were all expelled from the country, you can't prosecute foreign diplomats. Edit to add: Dikko Affair You can't prosecute foreign diplomats the same way you can't storm an Embassy.......... A quick perusal and Thatch ignored the Vienna Convention 'cos Iran blamed UK for staging it and I very much doubts their troops would've been allowed in London Had forgotten totally that siege of the yankee embassy in Tehran was going on at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Legally this doesn't really change anything. Assange can still be arrested and deported if he steps out of the Ecuadorian Embassy. There isn't a legally acceptable way of transporting him out, unless they make a car a special part of the Ecuadorian embassy or make him an official Ecuadorian diplomat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.