WikiLeaks' Assange in Ecuador embassy London: Seeks political asylum

Fidel wrote:

Photographed doc lays out Assange police tactics

Quote:

LONDON (AP) — A confidential document photographed byBritain's Press Association news agency lays out Scotland Yard's simple strategy for dealing with Julian Assange should he ever try to leave Ecuador's Embassy in London.

"Assange to be arrested under all circumstances," the hand-written note says.

The briefing paper, captured by an eagle-eyed photographer as an official carried it in his hand, lays out the major difficulty the WikiLeaks founder faces, even though he's received diplomatic asylum. He's safe as long as he remains in the embassy. The minute he steps outside, he faces immediate arrest — and speedy extradition to Sweden — over sex crimes allegations leveled against him there.

The Gladio Gang would never have been so arrogant as to violate international like this during the cold war era.

Do what? Arrest someone once they leave an embassy? What makes him so special once he's back on British soil?

Bacchus wrote:

You mean like Imre Nagy?

The Sovs justified their actions saying that the formerly Nazi-occupied countries would gravitate toward the Atlantic Alliance and threaten Russia militarily.

And nine years after dissolution of the USSR, the Sovs worst fears came true when the Gladio Gang launched blitzkrieg over the former Yugoslavia. And Russia is now surrounded by the fascist alliance and fending off terrorist attacks along the borders.

The Gladio Gang dreams of war as usual in addition to their relentless pursuit of whistleblower Julian Assange. The U.S. Military Government and its European minions of doom have no interest in respecting Nuremberg code or international law in general.

contrarianna wrote:

On polarized Babble, you would have two different answers based along ideological lines; you have two sides saying (or implying) the other side are faux progressives, or worse.

One side frames the issue as justice for women  versus rape apologists, and the other protection of whistleblowing journalists versus apologists for western totalitarianism.

There may indeed be both kinds of apologists on Babble but the issues need not be framed in such antagoinistic way for anyone who actually cares about justice (or logic), and who recognize that both the framers can have legitimate concerns.

The problem is that the two concerns (justice for women; protection of whistleblowers) SHOULD be entirely separate issues even when involving the same central figure (Assange) and which have their separate just process of resolution.

Unfortunately, they HAVE been linked by the prosecutorial states of the US/UK/Sweden and aided by the complicit media and their readers. They have been linked de facto proceduraly while at the same time, through smoke and mirrors, that link has been downplayed and denied by the states/media.

As the situation now exists there are 2 obvious resolutions:

1)Assange could submit himself for extadition to Sweden for incareration which would, according to all indicators, result in reshipment to a lifelong US hellhole based on an indictment that has nothing to do with the uncharged sex accusations.
No-one concerned with justice for women (or any justice) could endorse this.
It would be both insane and unjust for Assange to agree to this whether or not he was guilty of sex crimes, since this "punishment" would be unrelated to the sex accusations, except as a pretext for capture.

2)The states of the US/UK/Sweden could work out guarantees that he would not be extradited to a third nation. This would demonstrate that the main concern is indeed the course of justice for the women accusers. Don't hold your breath on that one.

Constitutional lawyer Glenn Greenwald outlined the issues involved in his column 2 days ago what would be a logical resoulution to this, which will continued to be refused by the prosecutorial states:

Quote:

The bizarre, unhealthy, blinding media contempt for Julian Assange

It is possible to protect the rights of the complainants in Sweden and Assange's rights against political persecution, but a vindictive thirst for vengeance is preventing that....

i don't know much 'bout this. but  this comment feels right.

Bec.De.Corbin wrote:

Round and round we go... And if after the interview they decide to charge him what next? They arrest him and take him to Sweden right?

Not without assurances that U.S. agents of doom won't swoop in and rendition Assange off to some secret gulag for torture, like they did in the example I so generously provided you with up thread. 

It appears now that you might be too broke to pay attention to the topic of discussion at hand. 

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Here's my question.  Why is Sweden more of a "stooge" and "lapdog" than the UK?  Why didn't just nab him when he was in the UK?  This "his flight to Stockholm will make a pit stop in the USA" stuff is problematic. 

I don't think anyone said the Swedes are willing stooges. Especially not with the previous Swedish scandal involving Mohammad Al-Zery and Ahmed Agiza. 

Quote:

"America security agents just took over," says Tomas Hammarberg, a former Swedish diplomat who pressed for and got an investigation into how the Egyptians disappeared.

"We know that they were badly treated on the spot, that scissors and knives were used to take off their clothes. And they were shackled. And some tranquilizers were put in the back of them, obviously in order to make them dizzy and fall asleep."

Question: Why would masked American security agents not repeat this exact same rendition scenario at a Swedish airport, and with the only exception being that this time they abduct Julian Assange? I can see it all now. A confusing incident unfolds at the airport in Sweden, and there he was - Gone! As in desaparecidos.

It's not like it hasn't happened before. It has and in very many U.S. client states in this hemisphere and beyond and definitely not since just 9/11/01. We are led to believe by lapdog newz media that U.S. Government-sponsored renditions, torture and executive death squads are new phenomenon since just the 2000's. And that is a lie.

Yeah, Fidel, as if you got room to talk about anybody not paying attention.

So this is all based on the USA snatching him from Sweden before they can do anything they have jurisdiction over him for and taking him to some secret prison where he will disappear? There is no way someone as popular as Assange (a wealthy European White man to boot) could just disappear in front of everyone and the USA get away with it. He’s not some little know terrorist. He would have to be tried in the US civilian court system like any other civilian.

I do not prescribe to the idea he will be treated as an enemy combatant held by the military or a terrorist at war with the USA help by the CIA, but I'm not surprised many here feel that way.

Nothing that I can see that wasn't public knowledge back when this story first broke ages ago. I believe I read something along these lines in the Guardian back in early 2011.

And the attempts to undermine the complainant haven't changed either. If people want to go after the Swedish prosecutors, fine, but going after an innocent party is not only pointless, it is highly offensive. I don't see that it proves anything at all, except the lengths to which some in the media will go. Using photos and hearsay and to kick around a sexual assault accusation in the open press is really low.

Or are they only part of the MSM assault when they write something we don't like?

TheDailyMail wrote:

The two women’s lawyer, Claes Borsgtrom, said yesterday: ‘We will only discuss the dinner at the restaurant and the picture in court.’

“I’ve always been a Daily Mail reader. I prefer it to a newspaper”. ~ Oscar Wilde

So rape allegations take a back seat to the conspiracy theories of the moment.  Shameful.

Why don't they just go question Assange at the embassy if that's what they say they intended to do all along? The Swedes questioned a Swedish national in Serbia suspected of murder. I don't understand why Assange is any more special than a murder suspect. Do the Swedes, Brits and Yanquis hovering over everyones shoulders  think rape is not that serious a crime? Why are they stalling because justice delayed is justice denied. Someone should light a fire under their derrieres.

Bec.De.Corbin wrote:

There is no way someone as popular as Assange (a wealthy European White man to boot) could just disappear in front of everyone and the USA get away with it. He’s not some little know terrorist. He would have to be tried in the US civilian court system like any other civilian. 

I don't believe he's rich, but Manning seems to have a popular following, and he hasn't been seen in public for over 800 days.  And the USA not getting away with things?  Really?  Don't they sign off on an incineration list at the White House every Tuesday?

Slumberjack wrote:

Bec.De.Corbin wrote:

Look, I don't care what any of you say or post from the internet. Assange would not end up in Gitmo and other secret US Military gulag. Not that I want to see him there but he'd end up in US federal court. 

How long would it take to wrap things up in a federal court, and where would they keep him in the meantime?  Where would they put him after sentencing?

The trial would take years. Assange would be held in a civilian jail facility during the trial unless he was put on bail. He would be sent to a civilian federal prison if he were sentenced just like any other civilian. In the US system jail and prison are two different facilities and the environment and populations are very different. Jail holds people who have two year or fewer sentences and people being held for trial. Prison is for people whom have been convicted and are serving time. Some facilities have both jail and prison in them and the populations are kept separate. The media circus surrounding any of this would be substantial to say the least so the notion he’d be whisked away to Gitmo or something is honestly unrealistic. But please don’t let that stop you from thinking otherwise.

Pvt Manning is in the US military prison system. I keep telling you people here that it is different from the civilian system Assange would be in because, despite what some seem to forget, he’s still a soldier and nobody here seems to listen; I don’t know what else to say.

Authority to offer assurances of course not but knowledge of the sytem he'd be in yeah, sure, I've only lived down here my entire life...

I agree he would not fare well if he ended up here in jail or especially prison. He would most likely be kept out of the general population for his own safety but it would still be hard time for him. But at the same time he wouldn't end up in Gitmo or whatever like many here seems to think.

Not that any of this is going to happen by the way...

running from what he hasn't even been charged? has anyone ever heard of any country asking for extradition of someone in another country when they haven't even been charged with anything?

note i'm not saying he isn't guilty of sexual assault or is. what i'm saying is they haven't even charged him and its been awhile. if they could or really wanted to ya'd think they would've!!!! least then they would have grounds for asking for extradition!!!!

it makes much more sense to me that he is running from rendition to the USA than to say he is running from sexual assault accusations

Yeah but, supposed sealed indictment aside, which nobody can really prove exists, he hasn't been charged by the USA with anything neither so it's like he's running from two different things that have not even happened (yet).

Im not saying he's guilty, Im just saying his actions serve him more than any cause of his.  He could string out extradition and gain international support far more than he does now with a US extradition attempt from Sweden (which never extradites anyone facing the death penalty)

Well that would be nice but I suspect sides are way too polarized for that

Unionist wrote:

Bec.De.Corbin wrote:

Yeah but, supposed sealed indictment aside, which nobody can really prove exists, he hasn't been charged by the USA with anything neither so it's like he's running from two different things that have not even happened (yet).

Right! So by Bacchus' logic, he's probably guilty of both!! Brilliant, thanks Bec and Bac.

Perhaps by his logic, which is not mine by the way, but I wasn't addressing your post at all.

'sealed indictment aside'???????? how can you even put that out there??????

and i asked again has anyone ever heard ever of a country asking for extradition when they haven't even charged someone with a crime?????

he already has international support.  why the hell would he want to be rendered to the USA???? i don't care what cause i represent...bottom line is if there is a target on me for going against the powers that be and i might end up disappearing i'm going to protect myself!!!!!

quizzical wrote:

'sealed indictment aside'???????? how can you even put that out there??????

'Supposed' 'sealed indictment aside'

I don't mind you quoting me or picking my posts apart but please select everything in a quote if you do. You left out a word, there's a big difference in the meaning when you drop that one word. I hope it wasn't on purpose to try and change what I said.

Fidel wrote:

I apologize if I have offended you. I'm not assuming that anyone is lying, and the two people accusing Assange obviously have a good lawyer with integrity representing them. 

On the other hand, Assange and his lawyers have invited Swedish authorities to interview Assange there at the Ecuadoran embassy in London. They have refused.

They could also issue a guarantee that Swedish authorities would abide by international law and not allow extradition to the United States where Assange's right to a fair trial is highly in doubt. 

It appears that none of Sweden, Britain or the United States of America are interested in adhering to international law. Assange has agreed to cooperate, so why can't the U.S and its European minions of doom offer to do the same? And given the current state of lawlessness in America and Europe with respect to all that has happened since 9/11, I, personally, would not trust anything western governments offered me if I was in Assange's situation. The two women accusing Assange have rights, and so does Julian Assange have certain rights. And the entire situation is tainted by colder war political maneuvering. It's not saying very much for the state of lawlessness in general here in the western world. This is just a small example of western world hypocrisy, and it's on display for all the world to observe. 

You didn't really offend me so much as the article that was posted earlier (not by you), which stated unequivocally that the allegations against Assange were false.  The article should never have been posted without an accompanying denunciation of those extremely offensive passages relating to the women involved.  I'm sorry if I came off too aggressively towards you but it's a sensitive subject to me.  I was the victim of a very violent rape many years ago and when I finally returned to work after nearly a month recovering from serious injuries, a co-worker told me a number of the guys at work had made comments along the lines of "what did she expect with the way she dresses" - typical pig engineers.  I quit that day because the management would not do anything about those pigs.  The comments in the article just came off the same way - denigrating the alleged victims.

I certainly understand why Assange has sought asylum in the Ecuadoran embassy because he has no reason to trust any of the governments involved and is potentially facing punishment far worse than even a rape conviction would merit.  One thing is certain - he cannot live in the embassy forever.  Hopefully a solution will be worked out but I doubt there will be a solution that respects both Assange's rights and the alleged victims rights.