Thread: Judge approves Assange extradition

Originally Posted by lom

You'd better do your homework and find out the purpose of the meeting, otherwise you will also look like one of those idiot supporters.

You mean like this ?

Unasur Calls Crisis Summit Over U.K. ‘Threats’ to Seize Assange

Ecuador said the Union of South American Nations called an emergency meeting to discuss U.K. “threats” to seize WikiLeak’s founder Julian Assange from inside its embassy in London.

The 12-nation group, known as Unasur, will hold a meeting of foreign ministers on Aug. 19 in the Ecuadorean coastal city of Guayaquil, according to a statement published today in the country’s presidential gazette. Ecuador’s Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino said yesterday he also requested an emergency meeting of the Washington-based Organization of American States as well as the Venezuelan-led group of nations known as ALBA.

Ecuador accused the U.K. yesterday of threatening to “assault” its embassy in London and arrest Assange, who is seeking sanctuary in the South American nation. Today, Assange was granted asylum over U.K. objections, setting up a confrontation with Britain after it said it would not allow him safe passage out of the country.

“The unauthorized entry of any British authority into the Ecuadorean Embassy compound would be a flagrant violation” of international treaties protecting diplomatic missions, the statement said.

U.K. Foreign Secretary William Hague said today his government won’t storm the embassy and was seeking a “diplomatic solution” to the impasse.

Unasur’s 12 members are Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Colombia, Chile, Ecuador, Guyana, Paraguay, Peru, Surinam, Uruguay and Venezuela.

Unasur Calls Crisis Summit Over U.K.

or like this ?

South American bloc adopts resolution on UK threats to Ecuador

Published: 20 August, 2012, 01:30

The Ministers of Foreign Affairs of (L-R) Peru, Rafael Roncagliolo, Ecuador, Ricardo Patino, Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro, and Colombia, Maria Angela Holguin, answer questions to the press after an extraordinary meeting of the Council of Ministers of UNASUR in Guayaquil, Ecuador on August 19, 2012 (AFP Photo / Rodrigo Buendia)

TAGS: South America, UK, Politics, Human rights, Law, WikiLeaks, Assange
The Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) has unanimously adopted a seven-point resolution supporting Ecuador’s right to grant Julian Assange asylum and condemning British threats to raid a sovereign state’s embassy in order to arrest him.
Foreign ministers of the 12-member bloc took part in an extraordinary meeting in Guayaquil, Ecuador’s largest city. A resolution was adopted just eight minutes after the session began, and was read out by Secretary General Ali Rodriguez.
Rodriguez' readout of the resolution was met with loud applause.
The document reaffirmed the sovereign right of any country to grant asylum and condemned threats to use force, stating that the bloc’s foreign ministers had taken into account the aide memoire Britain sent to the Ecuadorian Embassy in London on the eve of the announcement of the decision on whether to grant Assange asylum.
The resolution reiterated “the inviolability of embassies” and the Vienna Convention, saying that principles of international law could not be overridden by domestic laws, such as the Diplomatic and Consular Act of 1987, which grants the British Secretary of State discretion to revoke immunity to ambassadorial premises.
The organization vowed to encourage all parties to the Assange case to continue dialogue to find a solution within the framework of international law. The importance of refuge and asylum for the protection of human rights was also reaffirmed by the South American foreign ministers.
After the session, Ecuadorian Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino addressed the press.
He noted that while the United Kingdom was a country far more powerful military-wise than Ecuador, the small Latin American country had the high ground in terms of its understanding of international law.
“Reason does not call for force,” Patino stated. “The force may be as different and as distant as a small country and a country which has atomic bombs. But here, reason is with us."
Patino thanked fellow Latin American nations for firmly supporting Quito on the issue and said he was pleased with the fact that Julian Assange knows that the region respects international law, the right to personal integrity and the freedom of expression.
He also said he waiting for a resolution expected to be adopted at a similar foreign-minister level meeting of the Organization of American States (OAS), which is scheduled to meet next Friday.
Ecuador convened a number of regional meetings following the threat to storm the country’s embassy in London.
On Saturday, representatives of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) adopted a similar eight-point resolution condemning Britain for its “intimidating threats” to violate the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity.
On Friday, a special meeting of the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States, which envelopes countries from North, Central and South America, voted to hold a meeting of the member states’ foreign ministers in order to discuss the same resolution filed by Ecuador.

South American bloc adopts resolution on UK threats to Ecuador — RT

So it is not about one man and a few idiotic supporters, it is about U.K threats to enter the embassy area and arrest a person inside.
It is about a general principle and not a particular person, it should not be seen as the other SA countries agreeing with Ecuador's asylum for Assange or taking his side in the extradition case.

Originally Posted by Panty Hamster

Originally Posted by larvidchr

But of-cause (it's COURSE!) the US will take him if they at some point can get him served on a silver platter

I respect what you have to say, Larv, but you really need to look into the first amendment. Even though it doesn't apply to him, it will still be respected.

The US already has the culprit. Assmange is a pretentious self-important twat looking to be a martyr.

I agree, that is why I say "served on a silver platter" as in finding something else to pin on him that will not be covered by the first amendment protections and be a crime according to US Law.

Originally Posted by lom

So it is not about one man and a few idiotic supporters, it is about U.K threats to enter the embassy area and arrest a person inside.
It is about a general principle and not a particular person, it should not be seen as the other SA countries agreeing with Ecuador's asylum for Assange or taking his side in the extradition case.

Yep nothing to do with Assange and the Swedish problem, nothing to do with wikileaks, but all to do with the blooper the Brits made by mentioning the consular act of 1987 when they had no intention of going down that road anyway.

The South American nations grabbed that mistake lightening quick, they have elegantly avoided focus from the fact that they misuse the diplomatic status of their mission in London to give political asylum to a man that do not qualify, not even closely.
And Britain have ended up looking like rash clowns once again, even though all they have tried to do is play fair both to Assange and to Sweden.

Originally Posted by lom

So it is not about one man and a few idiotic supporters, it is about U.K threats to enter the embassy area and arrest a person inside.

yep , the issue is a LOT larger than Assange and the Brits fell right into it at the deep end .

Originally Posted by Mid

yep , the issue is a LOT larger than Assange and the Brits fell right into it at the deep end .

Please keep your "tarring and feathering" to the present UK goverment, or should I say the "holiday temp", rather than "the brits".

Originally Posted by lom

it is about U.K threats to enter the embassy area and arrest a person inside.

It's UK - there is no U-Dot-K-Dot needed yankee doodle.. Ah let me guess you use your middle initial in everything too - like Chip K. Retaud (pronounced, CHIP K. REE-TARD of course as the french accent long since disappeared.)

ouch , who pissed in your weeties Tom ?

Every fucking day it is costing the UK taxpayer £ 1000's.
This creepy bastard...., great show on the balcony though Julian.
You never quite rocked the street, never mind the world.
There are charities over the world for sick children etc., i would give £1000 into that pot for 2 kicks at this twats head and feel i had the world good.

Such hate dobella. Best to let it go. Leave the diplomacy to the diplomats, eh?

Yes, uh, dislike seems to be an understatement

Originally Posted by Mid

ouch , who pissed in your weeties Tom ?

Did I write that?

Originally Posted by Sir Wilson

Such hate dobella. Best to let it go. Leave the diplomacy to the diplomats, eh?

I'd love to mate but they dont seem to being a very good job on my taxed wage.
If we open the door to all knobheads with issues then where will it finally stop ?Oh fuck me, we already have.
Anyone with an issue in your home nation PLEASE come to the UK, we love paying all your bills and expenses and will even give you airtime on tv. to tell all your mates to come and join you.

Whilst i have very little sympathy with Assange relating to Sweden's request, the arrogant and pompous manner in which the UK government have gone about this very delicate issue only confirms that nothing much has changed since my own personal experience of these people some 15 years ago.

I was not the target of their displeasure but was present whilst they attempted to make my boss feel 'uncomfortable' behind closed doors. They wear different hats when it suits and currently they are wearing one with egg dripping from it.

Long may it drip!

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

You know dobella, many people feel that the UK is a 'soft touch' and immigrants get an easy ride and it pushes down wages, etc. But who's fault is it? You really think the liberal "bleeding hearts" were behind the cheap immigrant workers? Of course not, it was the wealthy business owners who wanted to get rid of the unionized British workers (Thatcher), and decades of bringing in immigrant workers to do jobs at slave-labour prices, precisely so the owners could keep wages down. So who's the real enemy? Look up, not down.__________________

That is the best post yet you have made and i totally agree.
But i did love Thatcher coz i was out of the UK making money for me and my family at the time, and not sponging on the soft benefit system.

In their worship of Julian Assange, the standard-bearers of the Left are destroying everything they once held dear

By Dan Hodges
Politics
Last updated: August 23rd, 2012


They just can’t help themselves. Today it’s John Pilger in the New Statesman: “The pursuit of Julian Assange is an assault on freedom and a mockery of journalism”.

One by one the cream of the intellectual left (and George Galloway) are lining up, in well-disciplined rows, to hurl themselves lemming-like onto the rocks of WikiLeaks.

Tony Benn: “the charges are that it was a non-consensual relationship. Well that's very different from rape”. Galloway: "Even taken at its worst, if the allegations made by these two women were true, 100 per cent true, and even if a camera in the room captured them, they don't constitute rape”. Pilger: “Swedish case documents, including the text messages of the women involved, demonstrated to any fair minded person the absurdity of the sex allegations”.

I haven’t been privy to all the Swedish case documents: documents which, let’s not forget, are the basis of an approved extradition request.

But I have read the High Court ruling, in particular the following section which is from one of Assange’s accusers, a women identified only as AA:

“Mr Assange wanted to insert his penis into her vagina, but she did not want him to do that as he was not using a condom. She therefore squeezed her legs together in order to avoid him penetrating her. She tried to reach several times for a condom which Mr Assange had stopped her from doing by holding her arms and bending her legs open and trying to penetrate her with his penis without a condom”.

It’s for a Swedish court to decide whether what is described above represent a true description of the events, and whether they in turn constitute a crime. But to my mind they go beyond what George Galloway described as nothing more than “bad sexual etiquette”. Nor can I see any “absurdity” in the allegations. Or the difference between what is alleged and the “the seizure by force of a woman for gratification of a man’s need”, which is Tony Benn’s preferred definition of rape.

But perhaps that’s because I’m not looking at this issue through the same warped prism as Assange’s supporters. People like Craig Murray who went on Newsnight and named one of Assange’s alleged victims. Or Seumas Milne, who this week stated that it was “hardly surprising that sceptics have raised the links with US-funded anti-Cuban opposition groups of one of those [women] making the accusations”; though to be fair to Milne, he does at least have the good grace to acknowledge “None of that should detract from the seriousness of the rape allegations made against Assange, for which he should clearly answer.”

Sadly, their hero is unlikely to be answering anything at the moment, given that he has opted to lock himself away in the Ecuadorean embassy. But that doesn’t bother the Assange apologists.

They believe that by publishing a series of leaked US government cables, their man has made himself above the law. Never mind that the request for his extradition had been affirmed, confirmed and reaffirmed by three independent UK courts. Never mind that it is Sweden, regularly and religiously worshipped as the cradle of liberal social democracy, that has made the request for that extradition. It’s about WikiLeaks. And WikiLeaks supersedes all.

Belittling the crime of rape. Smearing the alleged victims of rape. Naming them. This isn’t coming from the pages or voices of the far Right. This is from the self-styled standard-bearers of the Left. Have they lost their minds?

In a word, yes. They have become infected by some form of ideological virus; a sickness. Blinded by their hatred of the United States, the establishment in general and their almost juvenile excitement at “the biggest leak of secret government documents in history”, they are greedily hurling everything they once professed to hold dear onto a bonfire of their own vanity.

Remember, these are not Twitter warriors we’re talking about. It’s Members of Parliament; award-winning journalists; a former ambassador.

It is a staggering, sickening spectacle. I’m so transfixed with morbid curiosity I don’t know where to look. Do we point to the sheer hypocrisy of those who have spent years banging on about the need for "war criminals" like Tony Blair to be brought to book, but now so casually discard the validity of an international extradition warrant? Should we focus on the way this clique of supposed "internationalists" has become so tiny that they are now deaf even to the cries of the dwindling band of fellow travellers who are begging them to see the damage they are doing to the Great Cause? Or should we instead simply concentrate on the absence of basic humanity that prevents the Assange booster-club from even entertaining the possibility that two women could have been sexually violated, and that they at least deserve to have their claims investigated via due judicial process?

Maybe none of those things. Perhaps we should just stand back and reflect on the greatest irony of the Julian Assange and WikiLeaks affair. His supporters told us this was the moment a bright light would be shone into the darkest recesses of global power politics. When we would finally peer deep into the blackened souls of our global rulers.

But in fact it isn’t the Tony Blairs and George Bushes who have been exposed by this whole squalid business. It’s the Pilgers and the Murrays and the Galloways and the Milnes. It’s their values and character that are now on trial. And unlike their hero Assange, they have nowhere to run or hide.

the daily telegraph uk

Ah right-wing sanctimony. Up is down, left is right. The Telegraph writes a Guardian piece as it suits their spin.

^ A little graphic there but Julian likes to expose every thing.
No condom, and she refused to open her legs....
Come on Julian you hero of free speach, what happened next ?
Each day goes by costing the UK taxpayer £1000 's.
Let me kick the smirking bastard, i'll divvy up £1000 to any charity.

Many on the left - who support Wikileaks - want Assange to be extradited. There have been plenty of articles in The Independent (good article by Laurie Penny a couple of days ago), the Guardian and the New Statesman (which has published articles which are extremely critical of Assange alongside Pilger's). But then reading those before writing this article would be the first step on the road to becoming a journalist and I think that's a sackable offence at the Telegraph these days.

tom sawyer

Ah right-wing sanctimony.

Spartist



An individual who observes Marxist theory to the exclusion of all else. Often comndemns most things in society and the world with meaningless far left-wing dogma, and often end up in illogical cycles and jumping to conclusions in the process. Such people claim to be progressive, but are as backward thinking, unimaginative, blinkered, hare brained and colourless as the leaders of the former Soviet Union and Communist Eastern Europe. The word comes from the Private Eye "Archetypal left-winger" Dave Spart.

Tariq Ali, Hugo Chavez, John Pilger, Seamus Milne and Noam Chomsky are typical Spartists.

a comrade of yours i believe

I am old enough to remember Pilger and his dis-respect for the effort that the Aussies put into the Vietnam war.
He sickened me then and he still has to push his fucked up left wing view into this with his fellow anarchist.
Bullet for Mr. Pilger and Guantanomo Bay for cocksucker Assange.

^^
Are you Ayn Rand's widower by chance?

Originally Posted by dobella

Come on Julian you hero of free speech, what happened next ?

Could it be he fears it will be exposed when he is questioned by the Swedish cops?