Thread: Judge approves Assange extradition

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

Once again (see post 13), what's Ecuador's stake in this?

Assange interviewd the president of Ecuador on his show which is on RT and they apparantly struck up a friendship, plus Ecuador having a lefty government like quite a few countries in S America isn't exactly on very friendly terms with the US and generally delight in pissing the US off.

One of the stories that will eventually get attention is shame on Sweden (you'd need to listen to the statement by the Ecuadorian Foreign Minister.. Maybe it will be posted in full, but it was long and detailed the discussions with all three countries - Sweden, UK and US.

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

Once again (see post 13), what's Ecuador's stake in this?

I'd say a penchant for notoriety, what else? You know small S.American country steps in to bloody the nose of the United States and the UK.

tom sawyer

Ecuador has just shot to the top of the league table of human rights and social justice.

Human Rights in Ecuador | Human Rights Watch

Corruption, inefficiency, and political influence have plagued the Ecuadorian judiciary for many years. In a referendum held in 2011, President Rafael Correa obtained a popular mandate for constitutional reforms that could significantly increase government powers to constrain media and influence the appointment and dismissal of judges.

Ecuador’s laws restrict freedom of expression, and government officials, including Correa, use these laws against his critics. Those involved in protests marred by violence may be prosecuted on inflated and inappropriate ‘terrorism’ charges.

Impunity for police abuses is widespread and perpetrators of murders often attributed to a “settling of accounts” between criminal gangs are rarely prosecuted and convicted.

Thanks all. Makes sense. I usually am up on the news, but Wiki just never really interested me as I thought it was much ado about little. A bunch of dated State Department cables that said little of import, as State Department cables are prone to do. Tempest in a teapot.

This is the Assange interview with the Equador president if anyone is interested, if not ignore.......

They are a tool of the US State Department.

if you say so then obviously it is so.

i stand corrected.

^
Suspend your disbelief old fella, suspend your disbelief. Problem with you is your refusal to open your mind that the world isn't as black and white as you've been led to believe. Look at who HRW attacks and then wonder about the ones they let off the hook, or soft-peddle. Washington could have written most of their narratives. Nearly cut-n-pastes. "Mutually supportive" I believe is the term used these days.

The UK has just proved itself to be the US of A's bitch!

Do try to calm down, the British authorities would of-cause never enter the Ecuadorian embassy for the sake of a nobody like Assange.

They might wait outside if they can be bothered, but that probably really depends how embarrassed they are over the mistake not arresting him and keeping him locked up after the extradition was decided on the first time in court, and on who's diplomatic relationships they value the most Sweden or the Dictator in Euquador, (pretty funny that is where Assange has chosen to run to by the way a pocket dictatorship where freedom of the press is under attack shows him up for what he is a man without integrity)

The whole thing is a scam, more realistic lawyers and experts have already pointed out that it is actually less likely the Swedes would extradite Assange to the US than their trusted strong ally Britain.

And now to the crux of the matter, there is no fvucking extradition request from the US, so the whole thing is just a bogus load of rubbish.

You have to wonder why Assange is so god-damned desperate to avoid answering questions with the Swedish Police, his desperate behaviour reeks of guilt by now.

He has crapped on his British host's who gave him a fair hearing and now I doubt Britain will be proud to have aided a possible sexual predator sleazebag avoid justice.

Assange is an egotistical arsehole.

Many of the original wikileaks founders fell out with him when he turned it into a way of promoting himself rather than the 'original agenda'.

Originally Posted by buriramboy

Originally Posted by Sir Wilson

Assange is not a diplomat, and he still needs to leave the embassy to get to the airport, the Brit copper who suggested they might storm the embassy to get him is an imbecile.

Or maybe the imbecile is the one who spouts trash on an internet forum without knowing the law.

What law did I 'spout', stalker? Point it out to me, if you can?

I made an inference to the diplomatic storm that the UK would create, if they storm the embassy, which is 100% true. Never mentioned any laws, you need to get over your hard on for me, it's really rather embarrassing.

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

Thanks all. Makes sense. I usually am up on the news, but Wiki just never really interested me as I thought it was much ado about little. A bunch of dated State Department cables that said little of import, as State Department cables are prone to do. Tempest in a teapot.

Do you mean wikipedia or wikileaks?

Wikipedia isn't as bad as it's made out to be. Just beware any articles that don't have references.

This is about the powers of the Western world (let's be clear, the capitalist world) letting the hammer fall. Even Sweden has bent over - shame.

so he may be a rapist, but you dont think he should be extradited to sweden for trial to decide his innocence or guilt.

Again, if you had listened to the FM (admit you needed to be listening live), he was saying that the Embassy, sympathetic to the Swedish criminal charges, offered for sworn statements to be made within the Ecuadorian Embassy. Sweden refused, rather confusingly, as it has a history of allowing this in other cases, and has even done so in similar cases when the shoe was on the other foot and someone was seeking asylum in THEIR Embassy abroad. When the Ecuadorians sought assurances from the Swedes that they wouldn't use this case to then springboard to a third state's request for extradition the Swedes refused. He (FM) made something like 11 points - all sound - to arrive at the decision to offer asylum, with a preamble that listed UK's obligations to allow Assange and the Ecuadorians to give him asylum and take him out of the country. It was a thought-through statement. The UK will have trouble trying to find a way to respond - but you can bet the Foreign Ministry's lawyers and senior bureaucrats won't be going home tonight.

Maybe he has been offered a scholarship in Ecuador. Similar to the Chinese guy when he "left" China for the USA

Seven members but only four show their names. Why? Do we need THREE mods?

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

The UK loses all credibility if its storms that embassy and grabs Assange. The world is watching

UK has credibility ? oh please, the UK is a big fucking joke, not only all over Europe, but in the rest of the world.

You are just a lackey for the Americans and everyone can see it and laugh about it

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Seven members but only four show their names. Why? Do we need THREE mods?

I know paranoia is your middle name Tom. But any normal member can be invisible. They don't need to be a mod.

Cameron would only have to announce that inside the Ecuador Embassy lurks weapons of mass destruction and the British Army would be storming the ramparts

Which embassies would you put at the top of the list?