on the sovereignty of another country - to invade their embassy to arrest one guy? and not a "terrorist" or even a person charged with anything....
i hesitate to think about the unintended consequences... there will be no leg to stand on when say, Afghanistan or Pakistan or somewhere else decides to invade our or the UK's embassy under the pretense of getting one guy...
we're gonna be big fat hypocrites if that ever happens... no leg to stand on...
... a "terrorist" or someone really scary, it would still be dead wrong to allow the embassy to be invaded. I was talking to someone elsewhere who thinks Assange may be a spy of some kind. Ok, whatever. So would THAT make it ok to go in after him?
Remember when the American embassy in Tehran was attacked and occupied in 1979? Remember how they did that just for fun, just because they felt like proving a point that they could do what they wanted? No?... Of course you don't remember that. Because that is NOT why it happened. The people who took over that embassy claimed they were doing so because some of the people inside were criminals. But not just ANY criminals. No.... they were "SPIES".
Or a lot of money. Or has promised very lucrative military contracts.
British authorities have “warned” Ecuador that they could raid its embassy and arrest Julian Assange if he is not handed over. The Ecuadorian Foreign Minister responded by saying such a move would be a “flagrant violation” of international law.
Ecuador received a "direct" threat from the authorities in London that they are prepared to storm the Ecuadorian Embassy and arrest Assange if he is not delivered to their custody. Ricardo Patino, Ecuador's Foreign Minister, said the "written threat," an aide memoire, was delivered to Ecuador's Foreign Ministry and ambassador in London.
The letter received by the Ecuadorian Embassy stated that British authorities have a legal basis, founded in the Diplomatic and Consular Act of 1987, to arrest Assange on the Embassy’s premises.
"You need to be aware that there is a legal base in the UK, the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987, that would allow us to take actions in order to arrest Mr Assange in the current premises of the Embassy,” read the letter. "We sincerely hope that we do not reach that point, but if you are not capable of resolving this matter of Mr Assange's presence in your premises, this is an open option for us."
... whether or not Assange might really be guilty of some kind of sexual assault. I don't know. But what I DO know is that this whole game has NOTHING to do with that. Does anyone seriously believe this is about getting Assange extradited to Sweden "for questioning"? Ha! This is all about getting him to the United States! Via Sweden possibly... but ultimately to the U.S. Oh, and about that oh-so-important "questioning" the Swedish authorities want to conduct? Assange has invited them (lawyers, cops, witnesses, whoever) to come to the Ecuadorian embassy, and he'll answer questions for as long as they want. But they said no. Hmmm.... wonder why.
I have never in my life seen these super duper extraordinary measures take place to simply "question" one person.
AND he's already been questioned in Sweden regarding the allegations of one of the two women.
I don't have the link right now, but from what I've read of their "stories," they're lying their asses off, or they're just way too stupid and needy.
Of course it's all about Obama's Admin getting him to the U.S.
I wouldn't be surprised if Assange ends up in the adjacent cell to Bradley Manning -- sound-proofed, of course, where they could not communicate with each other.
... the next few years. I have no doubt they are prepping him as we speak to testify against Assange. He WILL eventually cave to the torture he's been put through. And in exchange, he'll eventually be a free man, and Julian Assange will never again see the light of day. I just hope Assange has enough friends in Anonymous and elsewhere to TAKE DOWN the fascists.
Comments
anybody?
I mean that's a lot of cops for just one guy.
another
holy shit - isn't that pretty much stomping
on the sovereignty of another country - to invade their embassy to arrest one guy? and not a "terrorist" or even a person charged with anything....
i hesitate to think about the unintended consequences... there will be no leg to stand on when say, Afghanistan or Pakistan or somewhere else decides to invade our or the UK's embassy under the pretense of getting one guy...
we're gonna be big fat hypocrites if that ever happens... no leg to stand on...
sigh...
Yep. But even if he WAS....
... a "terrorist" or someone really scary, it would still be dead wrong to allow the embassy to be invaded. I was talking to someone elsewhere who thinks Assange may be a spy of some kind. Ok, whatever. So would THAT make it ok to go in after him?
Remember when the American embassy in Tehran was attacked and occupied in 1979? Remember how they did that just for fun, just because they felt like proving a point that they could do what they wanted? No?... Of course you don't remember that. Because that is NOT why it happened. The people who took over that embassy claimed they were doing so because some of the people inside were criminals. But not just ANY criminals. No.... they were "SPIES".
Say!
Isn't this the country who couldn't touch Pinochet? By Jove, I think it is!
Somebody in Obama's Admin has pictures.
Or a lot of money. Or has promised very lucrative military contracts.
http://www.rt.com/news/assange-arrest-asylum-780/
They keep talking about...
... whether or not Assange might really be guilty of some kind of sexual assault. I don't know. But what I DO know is that this whole game has NOTHING to do with that. Does anyone seriously believe this is about getting Assange extradited to Sweden "for questioning"? Ha! This is all about getting him to the United States! Via Sweden possibly... but ultimately to the U.S. Oh, and about that oh-so-important "questioning" the Swedish authorities want to conduct? Assange has invited them (lawyers, cops, witnesses, whoever) to come to the Ecuadorian embassy, and he'll answer questions for as long as they want. But they said no. Hmmm.... wonder why.
yeah
smells like bullshit to me~
No, this is not based on the need to arrest a sexual
predator. Hell, he has no charges against him.
I have never in my life seen these super duper extraordinary measures take place to simply "question" one person.
AND he's already been questioned in Sweden regarding the allegations of one of the two women.
I don't have the link right now, but from what I've read of their "stories," they're lying their asses off, or they're just way too stupid and needy.
Of course it's all about Obama's Admin getting him to the U.S.
I wouldn't be surprised if Assange ends up in the adjacent cell to Bradley Manning -- sound-proofed, of course, where they could not communicate with each other.
I bet Manning will be out of jail within....
... the next few years. I have no doubt they are prepping him as we speak to testify against Assange. He WILL eventually cave to the torture he's been put through. And in exchange, he'll eventually be a free man, and Julian Assange will never again see the light of day. I just hope Assange has enough friends in Anonymous and elsewhere to TAKE DOWN the fascists.
Pages