Assange to go!

Hikari Kisugi said:
He hasn't been charged, they want him for questioning.
I find the UN having any such report generated absurd.


I am aware that Assange is concerned about extradition to the US if he is first moved to Sweden, but he still needs to answer his case in Sweden.
Click to expand...

Why can't he answer his case in the Swedish embassy?
 
Hikari Kisugi said:
I am aware that Assange is concerned about extradition to the US if he is first moved to Sweden
Click to expand...

He isn't, he knows full well that Swedish law forbids extraditing people for political crimes and that due to this Sweden have previously refused to send the US bigger fish than him. His story about the US being out to get him is simply designed to court public opinion.
 
ubersonic said:
He isn't, he knows full well that Swedish law forbids extraditing people for political crimes and that due to this Sweden have previously refused to send the US bigger fish than him. His story about the US being out to get him is simply designed to court public opinion.
Click to expand...

He also knows that the Swedes have been involved in cooperating in extraordinary rendition operations in the past with the CIA. If you were in his shoes would you trust them not to do the same if the CIA could manufacture some legalese that potentially allowed the Swedish authorities off the hook if they cooperated?
 
ubersonic said:
He isn't, he knows full well that Swedish law forbids extraditing people for political crimes and that due to this Sweden have previously refused to send the US bigger fish than him. His story about the US being out to get him is simply designed to court public opinion.
Click to expand...

Despite all extradition requests made by the US to Sweden being carried out.

Err the US is after him. WL plan to release FCO and John Kerry's cables apparently.
 
Mr Jack said:
The panel's ruling continues to be really bizarre. The UK cannot "release" Assange - we're not holding him - and we cannot cancel his arrest warrant or fail to act on it without breaching international law and our treaty commitments. Assange, on the other hand, can end his "arbitrary detention" at any time by facing up to the charges against him.
Click to expand...

So lets get your opinion straight... You are saying if Assange left the embassy tomorrow he would not be arrested by UK authorities?

Oh and for the umpteenth time: There are no charges against him
 
Moley said:
He also knows that the Swedes have been involved in cooperating in extraordinary rendition operations in the past with the CIA. If you were in his shoes would you trust them not to do the same if the CIA could manufacture some legalese that potentially allowed the Swedish authorities off the hook if they cooperated?
Click to expand...
Exactly!
The whole rape allegations are a nonsense. Perhaps the new President will offer Julian a full pardon for publishing the information which has proven entirely positive except to the low life Clinton types at present running the USA = the banking military industrial complex ( that Eisenhower warned us about all them years ago) Life for Julian is very negative in every which way yet I see no alternative - justice natural or indeed otherwise is anything but positive in the good old USA - Their ability to have detention centers outside the US legal system merely by removing them to territory outside the USA - which of itself has to be legally debatable. There is probably only one country strong enough to offer Julian asylum- its the country which now has probably the best news channel .. Check out documentary : Sex, Lies and Julian Assange
 
Last edited:
RaohNS said:
Despite all extradition requests made by the US to Sweden being carried out.
Click to expand...

You're talking about requests for murderers/etc. Sweden has never extradited anyone to America over political crimes as it's against their laws, this is despite the US getting very aggressive when they refused to send them Edward Lee Howard (CIA agent who defected to the USSR at the height of the cold war) who was of much bigger interest to the USA than Assange.
 
RaohNS said:
So lets get your opinion straight... You are saying if Assange left the embassy tomorrow he would not be arrested by UK authorities?
Click to expand...

No he's saying that the UK is not holding Assange and therefore cannot release him. Assange is hiding to avoid arrest, his current house imprisonment is entirely of his own volition.
 
Moley said:
He also knows that the Swedes have been involved in cooperating in extraordinary rendition operations in the past with the CIA. If you were in his shoes would you trust them not to do the same if the CIA could manufacture some legalese that potentially allowed the Swedish authorities off the hook if they cooperated?
Click to expand...

Right, because the UK - where he went perfectly voluntarily - has never been involved in extraordinary rendition? The idea of being scared that you'll be extradited or abducted from Sweden but are quite happy to go to the UK just doesn't make anything resembling sense.

Assange might believe it - I think the guy is genuinely delusional - but I don't see why anyone else should give his absurd excuses to try and avoid a fair trial the time of day.
 
ubersonic said:
No he's saying that the UK is not holding Assange and therefore cannot release him. Assange is hiding to avoid arrest, his current house imprisonment is entirely of his own volition.
Click to expand...

Prison in the Embassy or prison in the UK until he is flown to another prison in Sweden where he may have a dodgy trial followed by a highly likely rendition to a US jail...

Which form of jail do you not agree with here?
 
RaohNS said:
Prison in the Embassy or prison in the UK until he is flown to another prison in Sweden where he may have a dodgy trial followed by a highly likely rendition to a US jail...
Click to expand...

1: He isn't in prison in the Embassy, he is in hiding and is free to leave whenever he wishes.
2: Generally when people jump bail the result is arrest yes.
3: He wouldn't be flown to a prison in Sweden, he would be taken to a police station to be interviewed. This would result in wither his arrest or release.
4: If charged his trial would be in accordance with the law (and take place in a first world country with the eyes of the world on it), there would be nothing "dodgy" about it.
5: He would not be transferred to the USA, that is an impossibility as has been mentioned multiple times in this thread.
 
ubersonic said:
1: He isn't in prison in the Embassy, he is in hiding and is free to leave whenever he wishes.
2: Generally when people jump bail the result is arrest yes.
3: He wouldn't be flown to a prison in Sweden, he would be taken to a police station to be interviewed. This would result in wither his arrest or release.
4: If charged his trial would be in accordance with the law (and take place in a first world country with the eyes of the world on it), there would be nothing "dodgy" about it.
5: He would not be transferred to the USA, that is an impossibility as has been mentioned multiple times in this thread.
Click to expand...

1. So you are saying he would not be arrested if he left the embassy
2. So he would be arrested based on bail that was levied based on zero charges. Wonderful
3. So he would be arrested. You do know there are no charges (despite earlier erroneous statements)
4. We could hope for that
5. It is not an impossibility. In fact it was posted in the other Assange thread by a Swedish Professor in Law that Sweden could in fact tailor make a rendition request. Other posters have mentioned Sweden being used as a jump for extra-judicial transfers (wording is a wonderful thing in Law)

Virtually the entire case can be proven as a sham against him. Even someone else posting a "debunking" has in its own parts debunked itself and some shown to be wrong. Other points have had internet sleuths disprove and final points don't really draw heavily enough on the case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom