Assange seeks asylum in Ecuador embassy, London

[krtek a houby]

I'd get that Lisbeth Salander to talk to Assange. She'd get answers.

 

[elbows]

And, or, not, nor, nand, someones padlocked the logic gate.

 

[1%er]

The cramped Ecuadorian embassy, does Assange have an entourage?

 

[temper_tantrum]

It's the ground floor flat on the left - not the whole building.

 

[1%er]

It's the ground floor flat on the left - not the whole building.

Thanks, I thought it was a small room on the top floor.

 

[danny la rouge]

It's the ground floor flat on the left - not the whole building.

If he's going to be there the rest of his natural, I hope it has wifi.

 

[butchersapron]

I don't.

 

[elbows]

He's uploaded himself to the net but Anonymous haven't decided whether to grant him asylum yet.

 

[temper_tantrum]

I'm not aware of it having full shower/bath facilities so he probably hums a bit by now.

 

[butchersapron]

By now?

 

[danny la rouge]

I don't.

 

[DaveCinzano]

I'm not aware of it having full shower/bath facilities so he probably hums a bit by now.

That brings to mind a lengthy profile of him I remember from before all his troubles, when he was just a wandering info-nomad who thrilled his schili benefactors with enthusiastic gangly-limbed dancing (whilst also sharing around a whiff or two of his geek pits).

 

[friedaweed]

According to his review on getmeinfastasfuckrooms.com it's got a nice en-suite

 

[smmudge]

Well who knows apart from Assange why he won't go to Sweden. Maybe it's because he fears US extradition, maybe it's because he doesn't want to face charges. Unfortunately by the second argument one must necessarily assume his guilt (because if he was innocent he would go), and if I'm wrong I don't mind, at least my argument doesn't violate someone's basic human right of presumption of innocence before a fair trial.

'Behaving like a guilty man' - the same sort of thinking of those who argue that a woman who has breakfast with and throws a party for a man couldn't possibly have been raped by him.

 

[temper_tantrum]

You're a logic-free zone, aren't you.

 

[smmudge]

No.

 

[butchersapron]

Well who knows apart from Assange why he won't go to Sweden. Maybe it's because he fears US extradition, maybe it's because he doesn't want to face charges. Unfortunately by the second argument one must necessarily assume his guilt (because if he was innocent he would go), and if I'm wrong I don't mind, at least my argument doesn't violate someone's basic human right of presumption of innocence before a fair trial.

'Behaving like a guilty man' - the same sort of thinking of those who argue that a woman who has breakfast with and throws a party for a man couldn't possibly have been raped by him.

oh those poor prostitutes

 

[butchersapron]

Well who knows apart from Assange why he won't go to Sweden. Maybe it's because he fears US extradition, maybe it's because he doesn't want to face charges. Unfortunately by the second argument one must necessarily assume his guilt (because if he was innocent he would go), and if I'm wrong I don't mind, at least my argument doesn't violate someone's basic human right of presumption of innocence before a fair trial.

'Behaving like a guilty man' - the same sort of thinking of those who argue that a woman who has breakfast with and throws a party for a man couldn't possibly have been raped by him.

you are a mug.

 

[Combustible]

Unfortunately by the second argument one must necessarily assume his guilt (because if he was innocent he would go), and if I'm wrong I don't mind, at least my argument doesn't violate someone's basic human right of presumption of innocence before a fair trial.

So by this logic you must be against the detention of anyone on the run before they stand trial. Raoul Moat should have been left to go free since to try and apprehend him would be to assume his guilt.

 

[smmudge]

So by this logic you must be against the detention of anyone on the run before they stand trial. Raoul Moat should have been left to go free since to try and apprehend him would be to assume his guilt.

How does that follow? I've argued that Assange won't go to Sweden because he seems to fear US extradition. Have I said he thus shouldn't go to Sweden, be detained and stand trial? Have I argued that it's right for him to seek exile in Ecuador? I can presume his innocence and still think he should be detained and stand trial.

 

[butchersapron]

Yes you have argued that he shouldn't go and you offered what you thought were strong reasons why he was right to. Do have a re-read - keyword to look for is PILGER.

 

[ViolentPanda]

And, or, not, nor, nand, someones padlocked the logic gate.

There's a CMOS joke in there somewhere, but damned if I can find it!

 

[smmudge]

I just want you to know that I was challenged to do some reading up on this, so I did. I didn't have a definite position when I started (which some people accepted and lamented, and others want to think I did but changed it and so lamented) but now I do, and I have my argument formulated and backed up with many pages of evidence/sources. It has been very interesting, at least. And I just wanted people to know, so they're ready for when round 2 starts (and I'm assuming it will soon because I think this situation is going to change, Assange is unlikely to stay in the Ecuador embassy forever). Ready, get set.....

 

[twentythreedom]

GO!

 

[temper_tantrum]

http://bit.ly/LJx5Zm

Nick Cohen sums it up, really ...

 

[temper_tantrum]

Oh, and a bit more evidence against that famous 'easier to extradite from Sweden' argument ...

http://bit.ly/MSaFCM

 

[Random]

I just want you to know that I was challenged to do some reading up on this, so I did. I didn't have a definite position when I started (which some people accepted and lamented, and others want to think I did but changed it and so lamented) but now I do, and I have my argument formulated and backed up with many pages of evidence/sources. It has been very interesting, at least. And I just wanted people to know, so they're ready for when round 2 starts (and I'm assuming it will soon because I think this situation is going to change, Assange is unlikely to stay in the Ecuador embassy forever). Ready, get set.....

What's your position, what's your analysis now?

 

[danny la rouge]

http://bit.ly/LJx5Zm

Nick Cohen sums it up, really ...

This is a good bit:

He wants to renounce his Australian citizenship and become an Ecuadorean because (and you may have to bear with me) the Australian government failed to help him fight an attempt by the British government to extradite to him to Sweden, whose government may, at some undefined point, extradite him to the United States – or maybe not, because there is no extradition request.​

​

​

 

[Random]

I can see JA's point though - that the US may hold secret the grand jury's decision, then formally announce an indictment at the most favourable time.

 

[temper_tantrum]

Absolutely. But it's an insufficient reason to evade the questions facing him about this case.