Julian Assange loses extradition appeal at Supreme Court
Discussion
Soovy said:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileak...
You know, I generally don't believe all the New World Order and Illuminati rubbish, but going into another counrty's embassy to arrest someone?"
Just who the HELL does this government think we are?
Imagine if the Argentinians marched into our Embassy to arrest someone!!
It can't be just because of their "legal obligations" over a rape charge. Can't be. Governments are happy enough to ignore legal obligations when it suits them. You know, I generally don't believe all the New World Order and Illuminati rubbish, but going into another counrty's embassy to arrest someone?"
Just who the HELL does this government think we are?
Imagine if the Argentinians marched into our Embassy to arrest someone!!
Marf said:
I guess that very much depends on how you view soldiers.
a) Human beings with a conscience and free will.
or
b) State automatons who blindly follow authority.
And I guess that very much depends on your view of what he released....a) Human beings with a conscience and free will.
or
b) State automatons who blindly follow authority.
To a point, privates in the forces are very much (b). Soldiers wouldn't put their lives on the line otherwise.
I read one of the transcripts that he released and it didn't sound to me like a war crime (etc) had been committed, so why release it? Much of what he released were, I believe, hundreds of thousands of classified documents. Are you suggesting he'd read every one, decided they all constituted government wrong doing and took it upon himself to save the world?
Bad stuff happens in war zones. His job was not to be the moral arbiter. If he didn't like that, he should have left the army (IMO).
Murph7355 said:
Are you suggesting he'd read every one, decided they all constituted government wrong doing and took it upon himself to save the world?
If you didn't see that in my post, then I didn't suggest it. 
Murph7355 said:
To a point, privates in the forces are very much (b). Soldiers wouldn't put their lives on the line otherwise.
Fair enough, we will have to agree to disagree.Marf said:
I guess that very much depends on how you view soldiers.
a) Human beings with a conscience and free will.
or
b) State automatons who blindly follow authority.
Nazis were executed for crimes committed while simply 'following orders' so this raises many moral quandaries. Sure a soldier should not do anything to betray their country but there comes a point where the actions of governments and agencies go too far and at that point whistleblowing should not be seen as a betrayal but a soldier doing his bit for the good of mankind. a) Human beings with a conscience and free will.
or
b) State automatons who blindly follow authority.
For those who see Assange as being in this for himself alone, I don't think any sane person who has their own self preservation in mind with the knowledge of what evil acts our agencies are prepared to carry out, through the access that he has to documental evidence, would put themselves in this position. He isn't arrogant and selfish enough to publish the information in its entirety immediately nor to assume 'they' can't touch him hence the insurance provisions he has made. It has to be accepted he has taken a massive personal risk to do this.
Murph7355 said:
And I guess that very much depends on your view of what he released....
To a point, privates in the forces are very much (b). Soldiers wouldn't put their lives on the line otherwise.
I read one of the transcripts that he released and it didn't sound to me like a war crime (etc) had been committed, so why release it? Much of what he released were, I believe, hundreds of thousands of classified documents. Are you suggesting he'd read every one, decided they all constituted government wrong doing and took it upon himself to save the world?
Bad stuff happens in war zones. His job was not to be the moral arbiter. If he didn't like that, he should have left the army (IMO).
But what if the things he sees as a serving soldier are so dreadful as to make him believe that the public would be disgusted if we knew what went on and why, in our name and on our payroll?To a point, privates in the forces are very much (b). Soldiers wouldn't put their lives on the line otherwise.
I read one of the transcripts that he released and it didn't sound to me like a war crime (etc) had been committed, so why release it? Much of what he released were, I believe, hundreds of thousands of classified documents. Are you suggesting he'd read every one, decided they all constituted government wrong doing and took it upon himself to save the world?
Bad stuff happens in war zones. His job was not to be the moral arbiter. If he didn't like that, he should have left the army (IMO).
I agree with you to a point, but I think it's a necessary part of a democracy for all people to have a conscience at some point.
eharding said:
Assange hasn't got anything to worry about - if the FCO revoke the diplomatic status of the Ecuadorian Embassy and send the Met in to arrest him, on the basis of recent experience, it will take them four attempts at searching the building before they can hope of finding him, by which time he'll have been long gone, away on his toes in disguise.
The only possible downside for young Julian is if he makes the classic blunder of disguising himself as a South American electrician, and in a case of mistaken identity ends up being slotted by some Red-Bull-fuelled Robo-Rozzer as he's rushing for a tube train.
Bit near the knuckle... The only possible downside for young Julian is if he makes the classic blunder of disguising himself as a South American electrician, and in a case of mistaken identity ends up being slotted by some Red-Bull-fuelled Robo-Rozzer as he's rushing for a tube train.
Edited by eharding on Thursday 16th August 00:26
Edward, your talent is wasted up in the air!
Can you let me know when you respond to any thread... you make my day!!!
It's all bluster, unless Assange is planning on staying in the Ecuadorian Embassy until he dies, he's getting extradited. They can't get him out of the country without removing him from the embassy, and the only safe place for him then is in an embassy car which he will need to get out of to get on a plane. At which point he will be arrested. The only way around that would be for Ecuador to grant him diplomatic immunity which would be political suicide.
The government is just putting pressure on Ecuador to refuse the asylum application so that he can be quickly extradited and they can bat this political hand-granade into somebody else's court!
The government is just putting pressure on Ecuador to refuse the asylum application so that he can be quickly extradited and they can bat this political hand-granade into somebody else's court!
Bluequay said:
It's all bluster, unless Assange is planning on staying in the Ecuadorian Embassy until he dies, he's getting extradited. They can't get him out of the country without removing him from the embassy, and the only safe place for him then is in an embassy car which he will need to get out of to get on a plane. At which point he will be arrested. The only way around that would be for Ecuador to grant him diplomatic immunity which would be political suicide.
The government is just putting pressure on Ecuador to refuse the asylum application so that he can be quickly extradited and they can bat this political hand-granade into somebody else's court!
Unless the plane has the same status as said car. Threatening to enter the embassy is completely idiotic. What on earth were they thinking?The government is just putting pressure on Ecuador to refuse the asylum application so that he can be quickly extradited and they can bat this political hand-granade into somebody else's court!
league67 said:
Bluequay said:
It's all bluster, unless Assange is planning on staying in the Ecuadorian Embassy until he dies, he's getting extradited. They can't get him out of the country without removing him from the embassy, and the only safe place for him then is in an embassy car which he will need to get out of to get on a plane. At which point he will be arrested. The only way around that would be for Ecuador to grant him diplomatic immunity which would be political suicide.
The government is just putting pressure on Ecuador to refuse the asylum application so that he can be quickly extradited and they can bat this political hand-granade into somebody else's court!
Unless the plane has the same status as said car. Threatening to enter the embassy is completely idiotic. What on earth were they thinking?The government is just putting pressure on Ecuador to refuse the asylum application so that he can be quickly extradited and they can bat this political hand-granade into somebody else's court!
Bluequay said:
The government is just putting pressure on Ecuador to refuse the asylum application so that he can be quickly extradited and they can bat this political hand-granade into somebody else's court!
This, their tired of being stuck in the middle of what is already a very messy situation (which is only going to get worse) and want him out of the country. They have no real intention of following through in this threat, they just want to get him of UK soil so they can forget about him and get on with all the other crap sat in their inbox.AJS- said:
But what if the things he sees as a serving soldier are so dreadful as to make him believe that the public would be disgusted if we knew what went on and why, in our name and on our payroll?
I agree with you to a point, but I think it's a necessary part of a democracy for all people to have a conscience at some point.
When his name was brought into it I looked up what Bradley had released and read one of the specific articles cited (there were two specific ones - didn't read the other admittedly - plus notes that he released hundreds of thousands of other files).I agree with you to a point, but I think it's a necessary part of a democracy for all people to have a conscience at some point.
The one I read was transcripts of some civilians and reporters being killed. Personally, being totally neutral, it read to me like people doing their job. Contextually, with hindsight, they evidently made a mistake. But hindsight's perfect is it not.
From what I read, I could see nothing that warranted Bradley releasing the info and he should have expected nothing less than being banged up. And I do wonder if anything in the bulk of the info he released might have opened his countrymen to unnecessary and unwarranted danger - he cannot possibly have read them all and known for sure.
There need to be checks and measures, but Assange's methods are, IMO, likely to be as damaging (and possibly more so) than the current status quo. And I don't just mean to a few celebs and politicos.
I've been trying to find an answer to this, but it's not clear to me. So can anyone here help?
What on earth have Ecuador got to gain from granting him immunity, not to mention all the expenses they've already incurred by keeping him, and i presume feeding him, at the embassy for all this time? Are they also picking up the bill for the plane that's going to fly him to Ecuador?
I don't understand why they didn't just hand him straight over to the police? Does he have ties to Ecuador or something?
What on earth have Ecuador got to gain from granting him immunity, not to mention all the expenses they've already incurred by keeping him, and i presume feeding him, at the embassy for all this time? Are they also picking up the bill for the plane that's going to fly him to Ecuador?
I don't understand why they didn't just hand him straight over to the police? Does he have ties to Ecuador or something?
Art0ir said:
He'll be extradited to the US and you know it as well as I do...
I know nothing of the sort and nor do you at this stage (unless your real name is Tobias Billstrom ).The link I read elsewhere on this topic suggested that the Swedes have been less than impressed by the US approach on such matters involving Sweden and from those links it actually wouldn't surprise me if they told the US to do one. I certainly think we'd be more likely to just hand him to the US, but that's not what is happening.
All we really know right now is that he is wanted by the Swedes to face accusations of rape. And that he did a runner using his wikileaks venture as the rationale for pegging it.
But then I don't use bacofoil for head gear, amusing as it is.
nick s said:
I've been trying to find an answer to this, but it's not clear to me. So can anyone here help?
What on earth have Ecuador got to gain from granting him immunity, not to mention all the expenses they've already incurred by keeping him, and i presume feeding him, at the embassy for all this time? Are they also picking up the bill for the plane that's going to fly him to Ecuador?
I don't understand why they didn't just hand him straight over to the police? Does he have ties to Ecuador or something?
It will annoy the americansWhat on earth have Ecuador got to gain from granting him immunity, not to mention all the expenses they've already incurred by keeping him, and i presume feeding him, at the embassy for all this time? Are they also picking up the bill for the plane that's going to fly him to Ecuador?
I don't understand why they didn't just hand him straight over to the police? Does he have ties to Ecuador or something?
Do they need any other reason?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff