I have never supported the idea of activists using an embassy for political asylum. That’s not what embassies are for.
I nominate Rebecca Black songs.
Mentioning the 1987 British law permitting arrests in embassies was either a miscalculation on someone’s part, or else they thought Ecuador’s offering asylum was a forgone conclusion.
From the get-go the idea that the Swedish allegations were part of an American conspiracy has struck me as being much less plausible than their being what they appear to be. Some who were more skeptical have asked “would an ordinary person be the subject of Swedish-UK extradition requests for the investigation of this sort of crime,” to which my reply would be “Well, yes, given Sweden’s law on withdrawn consent, which as it happens I wholly agree with.”
And if there were a grand international conspiracy for the US to get Assange - presumably to try him for Hurting their Feelings in the first degree, since any such case would be a legal nightmare however much billious nonsense has issued from America on the Assange file - I daresay it wouldn’t be as easy to get him from Sweden as it would be from the UK.
“But, but, the piratebay…” no. The silly part of this case is Ecuador granting asylum to Assange so that despotic Britain doesn’t deport him to fascist Sweden at the behest of extremely eccentric wirepullers in Washington DC. Assange can’t leave the UK and Britain is unlikely to invoke the 1987 law in practice.
“Well, yes, given Sweden’s law on withdrawn consent, which as it happens I wholly agree with.”
My advice to all would be, don’t fuck anyone in Sweden. All this over two moistened bints having regrets after finding out they got pumped and dumped.
I dunno why I clear out my ignore list.
plonk
Just so it’s clear, “withdrawn consent” is not about regret after the fact. It’s about what happens after you tell your partner, “Hey, stop that!”.
In some places (e.g. Maryland in 2006) once consent for intercourse is given it cannot be taken back, no matter what your partner suddenly decides to do to you. Rather regressive, if you ask me, and similar to laws that spouses are immune from rape charges.
I think if a girl asks you repeatedly to use a condom, and you trick her such that you ejaculate into her, you should get charged.
Of course, unless they are “moistened bints” with regrets. Or however you choose to denigrate women.
Let me just say there’s a reason we have investigations, trials, fact findings, legal counsel, etc. Its so people are paid to figure out what happened and render appropriate judgement. Its not so people on a forum can deduce guilt or innocence based on the tidbits reported by foreign language papers and maybe translated into English.
Long story short, Assange needs to get dragged back to Sweeden so the legal process can run its course. It did with Dominique Strauss-Kahn and he was eventually released without having to go through a trial.
Indeed. The major issue with EAW’s is how EASY they are to get, not how hard!
Generally you just tolerate their presence. If you know who the intelligence guys are it makes tracking them much easier.
If they become a problem you can just revoke their diplomatic status and declare them persona non grata. The home country will send them home and replace them with someone else.
Irrespective of the politics of the situation, this post is misogynistic bullshit. Take it elsewhere. It’s not welcome here.
I feel that if UK invade this embassy, then invading any UK embassy is free game. Since that day, forever.
There is a real danger that Sweden will hand him over to the US where his chances of a fair trial is almost zero. And don’t give me any knee jerk stuff here. USA hands out insane prison time for trivial stuff all the time.
Don’t want to derail into a broader US justice system debate. In this particular case, I agree. I have very little faith he’d get anything resembling a fair trial in the US.
How exactly is his post misogynistic? It might be(well, is) distasteful and unpleasant but nothing about it is misogynistic.
Also, don’t pretend to be a moderator.
I think there is a role for it, much like monasteries used to be in the middle ages. This is despite my distaste for Assange, who is at best a useful idiot and hypocirte (Ecuador is kinda terrible on freedom of information)
His likelihood of a fair trial* in the US is moot unless you believe in the “US puppeteers want him to go from the UK to Sweden so he can be sent from there to the US” theory, which makes the somewhat puzzling assumption that getting him from Sweden to the US would be easier than getting him from Britain. What is this, Anglophilic conspiracy theory? Don’t people of this school of thought usually have some sort of poodle analogy for the special relationship? But now we’re getting minority governments in Scandinavia into the plan, what could possibly go wrong?
- For what? Treason-against-other-country? Espionage-after-the-fact? Doubtlessly officials in the US would like to crucify him, but wanting it enough to set the world howling at a travesty of justice that would turn him into a martyr is a different matter?
Whatever. You can’t use some nebulous fear of possible future arrest to avoid facing justice in another case. He’s accused of rape, he needs to face the fucking music.
As “Britain goes insane” threads go, it’s pretty mild.
There’s no need to enter the embassy, there was an attempt in the 80s to smuggle someone out of an embassy in a diplomatic bag, well crate, that was stopped. He’s not on ecquadorian soil in the embassy and he still has to get from there to ecquador which means traversing the streets of London at some point. Asylum doesn’t mean immunity from prosecution.
As much as I admire wikileaks I think he, personally, is a huge shithead and my sympathy for his plight can be measured on the worlds tiniest violin.scale at about .23
I wonder how far Ecuador is willing to go for Assange, because Britain can always expel all the Ecuadorian diplomats and get him that way, or condemn the embassy building or something and make them move to a new location. The political fallout from either scenario would be interesting to observe.
Ecuador could appoint Assange as a diplomat, thus giving him immunity from arrest in theory at least. Seems unlikely, though.