Assange to go!

[Castiel]

Quite, just reading up on Rafael Correa's (President of Ecuador) attacks of the media in his country, shocking and the complete opposite of what Assange says he stands for.

There's no principles here on Assange's part, he's deliberately chosen a South American country to align himself with because he knows, as we all do, that South Americans love to get one over on their Northern Cousins whenever they can.

Julian Assange would join the Taliban is it was his only way of avoiding facing the allegations in Sweden if that was his only option. It's no longer about morals or principles, but trying to evade a legitimate claim made against him.

Sadly too many people are falling for this selfishness being disguised as persecution.

I think it has nothing to do with any fear of extradition to the United States...people haven't mentioned that Ecuador has an extradition treaty with the United States, like the Swedish-US treaty it prohibits extradition on political charges, however Ecuador doesn't have an extradition treaty with Sweden.......people can draw their own conclusions.

 

[Xordium]

People do realise that the United States has not even said they want to arrest Julian Assange, let alone started extradition proceedings...which again this seems to have escaped everyone's notice that WE have an extradition treaty which the United States could have used to request his removal to the US, yet surprise, surprise, they haven't.

Also the irony that a so called champion of Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Information seeks asylum in a country which is hardly renowned for advocating such, quite the opposite in recent years...and to escape extradition to a Country whose committment to such freedoms is virtually peerless no less......

Oh, the ironing!!!!

So you think the US will make no attempt whatsoever to get him to face the music?

 

[Castiel]

So you think the US will make no attempt whatsoever to get him to face the music?

The pertinent question is, why have they not done so already?....while he was in a country with an extradition treaty which requires far less evidence of wrongdoing and has far wider scope for extradition than that of Sweden?

 

[Johnnytoxic]

Why do Sweden refuse to question Assange here? They cannot assure Ecuador they won't extradite him to the U.S

 

[Xordium]

The pertinent question is, why have they not done so already?....while he was in a country with an extradition treaty which requires far less evidence of wrongdoing and has far wider scope for extradition than that of Sweden?

I am suspecting that the implications of the alleged crimes in Sweden could prevent less public backlash, less known support for him there, language barriers for adequate defense. The whole charade that will go with a rape trial will effectively and already has demonised him in many peoples eyes.

So there you go I've answered you question now you answer mine

Do you think the US will make no attempt whatsoever to get him to face the music?

 

[estebanrey]

Why do Sweden refuse to question Assange here? They cannot assure Ecuador they won't extradite him to the U.S

Why should they?

Can you imagine a suspected burglar demanding he isn't taken into custody bur rather interviewed in his own home? The accused doesn't get to demand where and when they can be questioned and it is arrogant to assume someone should have that power.

Besides, let's say they do come over, question him here and aren't satisfied with his answers, what then? Do you think asssange would happily go and face a trial in Sweden? No, then he'll want to be tried here, which would mean leaving the embassy which he won't do.

If the Swedish authorities were to meet Assange's demands, they would have to come here, interview him inside the embassy (with Ecuadorian officials looking on and threatening to throw the Swedish prosecuters out at any time) and then have no power to hold him to account if they aren't satisfied with his answers.

Interviewing him here doesn't solve the problem, it just shifts it to the next stage.

 

[Castiel]

Why do Sweden refuse to question Assange here? They cannot assure Ecuador they won't extradite him to the U.S

Why should Julian Assange be treated differently from any other person accused of serious crimes.

If you or I were accused of rape and sexual assault, do you think the Police would drop by for a nice chat and acup of tea?....or conduct their interview over the phone or via a video-link?

Sweden have consistantly assured both the British Authorities and Assange's advocates that he will not be extradited...their laws would not allow such extradition on political grounds particularly when the charges carry a potential death penalty.

 

[Castiel]

I am suspecting that the implications of the alleged crimes in Sweden could prevent less public backlash, less known support for him there, language barriers for adequate defense. The whole charade that will go with a rape trial will effectively and already has demonised him in many peoples eyes.

So there you go I've answered you question now you answer mine

Do you think the US will make no attempt whatsoever to get him to face the music?

No you haven't....you haven't address anything I said at all.

I answered yours.

 

[estebanrey]

I am suspecting that the implications of the alleged crimes in Sweden could prevent less public backlash, less known support for him there, language barriers for adequate defense.

LOL, you've ripped all those arguments straight from the justice4assange.com website.

That last point about language barriers is just asinine, as someone who has lived in Sweden I can tell you they speak better English that many people who live here do. When I saw that on the aforementioned website it was then I realized how desperate they are getting with their arguments.

 

[Third Opinion]

in the meantime, maybe put a cork in it before slandering people with ludicrous unfounded statements.

i am sure he can make a speech form a balcony or open window it's not like Assange is camera shy

as fore stenbanrey what conspiracy theory are you talking about?

many US politicians (both democrats and republicans alike) and american journalist esp on Fox News have openly and vocally critisized Assange, some saying he should be put to death for being a traitor (eventhough he is not a US citizen). Furthermore Eric Holder, Attoney General, has been in talks with Sweden on possible extradiction. his problem is that he wants him but under the Espionnage Act, he can only charge the official who leaked the info not the website that published it. he is still working on a pretext to get Assange, but be in no doubt that US want Assange to face trial there. it's been written in numerous articles, featured in so many TV interviews that it is a little more clear cut than a conspiracy which would imply that the US deny any attempts to extradite him.

Well sorry I will have to agree to disagree with you on all that and not make it personal like you.

I personally feel that somebody is avoiding answering sexual assault claims by political means. As for camera shy, he has not been seen in ages and I personally find nothing clever about his actions given the severity of the charges against him. Maybe some thought should be given to the victims rather than pat this bloke on the back for his ability to slime his way out of answering to a possible hideous crime.

 

[Xordium]

LOL, you've ripped all those arguments straight from the justice4assange.com website.

That last point about language barriers is just asinine, as someone who has lived in Sweden I can tell you they speak better English that many people who live here do. When I saw that on the aforementioned website it was then I realized how desperate they are getting with their arguments.

No, I have not at all if you bothered to read my posts I am hardly in his fanclub. And I have also lived in Sweden, that's where I did the bulk of my training, and am well aware that their court proceedings are held in Swedish not English.

 

[Xordium]

No you haven't....you haven't address anything I said at all.

I answered yours.

No, you did not answer my question you evaded it entirely and asked another question. And then evaded it again. For the sake of brevity a yes or no would do.

And then I did answer you questions with what I see as the differences between Sweden and the UK ... if you did not mean the UK you should have been more explicit in what you actually wanted me to answer.

Once again simple yes or no. Do you believe the US will make an attempt to get him to face charges related to the leaks specifically the ones Manning supplied?

 

[Castiel]

No, you did not answer my question you evaded it entirely and asked another question. And then evaded it again. For the sake of brevity a yes or no would do.

No I didn't evade it at all.....you asked whether I think the US will seek his extradition, I said rhetorically why they have not done so already, particularly as it is easier to extradite from the UK to the US on espionage charges than it would be from Sweden which has strict limitations which the UK-US treaty doesn't possess.

And then I did answer you questions with what I see as the differences between Sweden and the UK ... if you did not mean the UK you should have been more explicit in what you actually wanted me to answer.

What you said did not address the point made at all....you simply made an unrelated paragraph based on an assumption that any potential court proceeding on potential sexual assault charges would be held in Swedish and therefore be prejudicial to Assange as well as claiming that if he is found guilty of sexual assault that will damage his reputation and therefore his support.

Once again simple yes or no. Do you believe the US will make an attempt to get him to face charges related to the leaks specifically the ones Manning supplied?

Which charges....as far as I am aware the United States has not indicted Julian Assange, laid any charges against him, or sought his extradition from the United Kingdom or any other country.

Before Ican give an objective answer on whether the United States woud actively seek extradition there should be at least some charges that reate to any potential extradition.

 

[Castiel]

It's not political grounds, if they just go for which tech crime charge. And they can just promise not to execute him.

Which charges have they made?

And if they go down a route that he stole (he didn't, he recieved) US property then the US-Ecuador extradition treaty would allow his extradition under those circumstances as well.

As for promising not to execute him, the treaty doesn't allow for non-statute alterations to possible sentencing criteria in the requesting country...if the crime carries a potentional death penalty then unless the US change the US penal code, the refusal would still stand.

 

[trigger-happy]

oh please, this sex offensive is fabricated.

 

[lunarwolf]

Well sorry I will have to agree to disagree with you on all that and not make it personal like you.

I personally feel that somebody is avoiding answering sexual assault claims by political means. As for camera shy, he has not been seen in ages and I personally find nothing clever about his actions given the severity of the charges against him. Maybe some thought should be given to the victims rather than pat this bloke on the back for his ability to slime his way out of answering to a possible hideous crime.

there are no charges against him, he is wanted for questioning. he has already been questioned by sweditsh authorities, the prosecution dropped the charges and let Assange free to leave the country. subsequently a diferent prossecutor has decided to reopen the case and wants Assange for questioning Again he has not been charged.
- woman A claims they had consentual sex but that assange "somehow" instentionaly broke/ripped the condom while having sex
- woman W had conseentual sex with Assange the night before and when she was waken up for a quickie without a condom this time (although shje did not resist or say to stop)
these are according to the statements made by the women and not Assange defense attorney. hardly a case to call the guy a "Rapist"! which is why the charges were dropped originally

btw you obviously have not followed this case. get your facts straight before even suggesting any opinions, or worse making personal attacks on Assange publically calling him a liar without any proof. it's called slander and is punishable by law if you were a credible person like a journalist.

don't tell me not to make it personal when you make it personal with Assange. do what you preach

sorry if it sounds harsh but i am getting weary of so many others who spout false claims. this leads to confusion with other people who have yet to form an opinion.

PS here are some background info from some reputable news sources
http://www.time.com/time/world/artic...035032,00.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/wo...julianpassange
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010...assange-sweden

 

[Xordium]

No I didn't evade it at all.....you asked whether I think the US will seek his extradition, I said rhetorically why they have not done so already, particularly as it is easier to extradite from the UK to the US on espionage charges than it would be from Sweden which has strict limitations which the UK-US treaty doesn't possess.

That is not an answer by your own definition it is a question. I then gave three reasons that immediately came to mind why the may see it as potentially preferable which relates to the below.

What you said did not address the point made at all....you simply made an unrelated paragraph based on an assumption that any potential court proceeding on potential sexual assault charges would be held in Swedish and thetefore be prejudicial to Assange.

Have you been in a Swedish court I have - the proceedings are held in Swedish. The cunning thing her is you know in France I believe they are held in ... French and in Russia well you're never going to guess this but ... Russian! I know it's quite amazing isn't it ... who would have thought!

Which charges....as far as I am aware the United States has not indicted Julian Assange, laid any charges against him, or sought his extradition from the United Kingdom or any other country.

Before Ican give an objective answer on whether the United States woud actively seek extradition there should be at least some charges that reate to any potential extradition.

So now bearing in mind your usual eloquence and obvious intelligence you seem to lack the creativity to imagine what I may have possibly meant by 'charges related to the leaks specifically the ones Manning supplied'. If you wish me to be very specific then I'll guess I'll really spell it out but then please stop with the politician's answers and just a straight yes or no, eh.

Castiel, do you think the USA will make any attempt to pursue charges against Assange under the Espionage Act (1917) for his involvement in the release and subsequent dissemination of classified material provided to him by Manning?

 

[Castiel]

there are no charges against him, he is wanted for questioning. he has already been questioned by sweditsh authorities, the prosecution dropped the charges and let Assange free to leave the country. subsequently a diferent prossecutor has decided to reopen the case and wants Assange for questioning Again he has not been charged.

btw you obviously have not followed this case. get your facts straight before even suggesting any opinions, or worse making personal attacks on Assange publically calling him a liar without any proof. it's called slander and is punishable by law if you were a credible person like a journalist.

don't tell me not to make it personal when you make it personal with Assange. do what you preach

sorry if it sounds harsh but i am getting weary of so many others who spout false claims. this leads to confusion with other people who have yet to form an opinion.

Lol.......


Are you related to Assange, why are you so concerned whether someone thinks he is a liar.......I think he is a liar...sue me!!!

 

[Xordium]

sorry if it sounds harsh but i am getting weary of so many others who spout false claims

You do know the only thing you may get people to agree on here is that everyone seems to be spouting false claims: the women, the Swedish police, Assange, politicians (well goes with territory), etc

 

[Chris [BEANS]]

Why should they?

Can you imagine a suspected burglar demanding he isn't taken into custody bur rather interviewed in his own home? The accused doesn't get to demand where and when they can be questioned and it is arrogant to assume someone should have that power.

Besides, let's say they do come over, question him here and aren't satisfied with his answers, what then? Do you think asssange would happily go and face a trial in Sweden? No, then he'll want to be tried here, which would mean leaving the embassy which he won't do.

If the Swedish authorities were to meet Assange's demands, they would have to come here, interview him inside the embassy (with Ecuadorian officials looking on and threatening to throw the Swedish prosecuters out at any time) and then have no power to hold him to account if they aren't satisfied with his answers.

Interviewing him here doesn't solve the problem, it just shifts it to the next stage.

As someone who knew little about this before venturing in, this seems to be the most rational, reasonable and realistic post. (aside from "(with Ecuadorian officials looking on and threatening to throw the Swedish prosecuters out at any time)", which although possible is just an assumption)