Julian Assange

bazv. If what you say is true, and I have no doubt whatsoever that it is, the man is a Pillock, doe’s he not realise he is a high profile figure, and as such would have had his every move monitored?.
Cannot wait to see what happens, better than reading a Crime thriller.:)
Jim.
Lincoln .7

Obviously I have never met Assange…but James Ball used to work with him at Wikileaks…

He said about JA

His self-certainty and drive break through to the point of arrogance. His behaviour can be erratic, and he’s not particularly considerate of those around him. As his online nickname “Mendax” suggests, he is quite happy to lie in the interest of what he sees as the greater good.

But the worst qualities Assange displays are not really his fault. Even before the huge storm caused by the embassy cables, he tended towards the paranoid. Imagine seeing senators, commentators and more discussing your every move, calling you a terrorist, threatening you, with that predisposition. The result is a heady mix of paranoia, a predisposition to self-interest. A willingness to manipulate the truth and a belief that what you’re doing is right is a potent and dangerous mix – and it’s what’s been driving Assange, and the chaos that follows in his wake, for almost two years now.

Andy.
As Equador HAS an Extradition Treaty with the U.S.A. Why don’t the U.S.A ask for him to be extradited, I think there is a lot more to this than meets the eye, as to why Sweden want’s to get him there for investigations into an ALLEGED offence.
Jim.

Lincoln .7

Perhaps Ecuador are going to give him to the US?

I must say, he is certainly keeping his head down the last few days, As for Aus, hasn’t another member stated he is not from Aus?.
Jim.
Lincoln .7

Australia are quite fussy about who they let into their country, citizen or not the Australian authorities are probably quite content that this individual is not in country and would probably be quite happy to keep it that way.

Australia has not expressed any desire to interrogate, question, detain or extradite the worm, so why does he need to claim asylum with Ecuador? surely anyone else would first look for shelter within their own country or embassy.

I am puzzled as to why, or how, Ecuador are legally empowered to offered this individual “assylum”. I think that assylum can only be granted in cases where “….a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country.” I think that is correct.

Since Assange is Australian (I believe?) has he made any attempt to seek the assistance of Australia? Surely, he has to show that if he was in Australia (rather than Sweden or the UK) then he would have “..a well founded fear of persecution.” But I am probably reading the intricacies of assylum incorrectly.

If this is correct (can somebody confirm?) then have the Ecuador Government granted assylum on the basis that he has a well founded fear of persecution in Australia?

Just curious!

Andy.
As Equador HAS an Extradition Treaty with the U.S.A. Why don’t the U.S.A ask for him to be extradited, I think there is a lot more to this than meets the eye, as to why Sweden want’s to get him there for investigations into an ALLEGED offence.
Jim.

Lincoln .7

Yes, I realise that.

Its just that I don’t follow what Amiga500 is saying.

Its probably me.

Andy, It may well be a “Back door” way of getting him to the States.

Jim.

Lincoln 7

It might just be me, but I don’t get your point (2).

Surely its the other way around. He is wanted to answer the matter of alleged sexual offences by the Swedish legal system.

Those allegations have nothing to do with why the US authorities may be interested in talking to him.

Their right to have the accusations investigated in Sweden is the right that has been violated here. If he’s innocent he has nothing to fear in terms of any investigation into these allegations.

1. Why is it a right to have someone taken to any particular country for investigation when the investigators have been offered the opportunity to interrogate him in the Ecuadoran embassy?

The Swedes can investigate away, they can interrogate away. They can even trial him via videolink. If he is found guilty, then you have a point about serving time in a jail of the jurisdiction he is found guilty of crime in.

Until then – their right to justice does not require Assange to be in any particular country.

2. You really don’t get it do you? He (and many others) consider the proving of the rape allegations right or wrong in a court to be inconsequential to him being eventually extradited to the US.

You would be calling in your story to be told can you hold, Rebekah Brooke’s is on the other phone with a hot seedy story..

Come on you could make a fortune with selling your story to a non Mudock paper!

My naughty night of sex with Rebekah:D

I’ve never been fussy but I wouldn’t want to fall asleep in her room…

I wonder if Rebekah Brooks has booked a nice room at the Embassy yet?

So you agree that rape/sexual assault is ok?….

Hmmm…..

Galloway didn’t say rape or sexual assault was OK, but that the facts as presented don’t constitute those crimes, which I agree with.

The US says he’s ‘cost lives’, but won’t elaborate. Perhaps they’re trying to justify chasing him because he’s let out some of their dirty little secrets

He named a load of Afghanistani informers, one would have thought Terry Taliban would have offed them pretty damn sharp ish.

Ecuadorian Embassy under the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987, it would appear that Ecuador has fallen foul of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961. Article 41 requires all diplomats “to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving state…and not to interfere in the internal affairs of that state

I would say they did not interfere, they would have been as suprised as the next man when he walked in the door and claimed Asylum… The bit that gets wooley is when he was given it…. You could argue the same case for the blind dissedent that turned up in a US embassy, however he left.

From what I can ascertain, there appear to be no direct flights between the UK and Ecuador. It looks possible to connect with flights to Ecuador, via Frankfurt, Madrid, or Amsterdam. A couple of routings even involve changing plane in the US. From Mr Assange’s point of view, the less appealing of them all I should think.

Not my logical extension….

Anti-rape campaigners have accused George Galloway of a “deeply disturbing and disappointing” attitude towards sexual violence after he claimed a rape allegation levelled at the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange had no basis because having sex with a woman when she is asleep is not rape.

“Even taken at its worst, if the allegations made by these two women were true, 100% true, and even if a camera in the room captured them, they don’t constitute rape,” Galloway said. “At least not rape as anyone with any sense can possibly recognise it. And somebody has to say this.

“Woman A met Julian Assange, invited him back to her flat, gave him dinner, went to bed with him, had consensual sex with him, claims that she woke up to him having sex with her again. This is something which can happen, you know. I mean, not everybody needs to be asked prior to each insertion.”

Lawyers and anti-rape campaigners said Galloway was wrong and the law is clear that consent is required every time someone has sex.

Can’t disagree with Al’s description of Galloway as “the odious little man”…

The logical extension of what you’re saying here is that George Galloway agrees with rape/sexual assault.