Assange to face extradition

[smmudge]

So what? Is your argument that this justifies him not going to sweden? The bigger picture, cut the rape allegations out picture (not to forget getting angry at the mere suggestion that you don't want him to face rape allegations picture).

When have I ever argued he shouldn't go to Sweden and face rape allegations?

 

[Deareg]

You know that it's not the issue don't you? Every attempt to reduce this down to Assnage vs the US, of perfidious albion vs the whole of latin america cuts the rape allegations away from this whole issue. It effectively says, fuck that shit, only the bigger picture counts.

The wider issue is the US's murderous foreign policy, the mass murder and colonisation of whatever part of this planet that they take a shine too, it might be just a straightforward rape allegation to you but to others there is far more to it.

 

[butchersapron]

When have I ever argued he shouldn't go to Sweden and face rape allegations?

I see you did follow the suggestion i made in the brackets.

Ok, here's where - where you suggest that he shouldn't if he fears being extradited to the US.I think he should even if he fears being extradited. Do you?

 

[butchersapron]

The wider issue is the US's murderous foreign policy, the mass murder and colonisation of whatever part of this planet that they take a shine too, it might be just a straightforward rape allegation to you but to others there is far more to it.

Well out with the logic then, say it openly - he should do all he can to avoid the rape allegations for the wider good of the oppressed.

 

[Casually Red]

The very same Baltasar Garzón who issued the international warrant for the arrest of Pinochet...

and more besides . Why would he want to protect a nonce do you reckon ?

 

[Deareg]

Well out with the logic then, say it openly - he should do all he can to avoid the rape allegations for the wider good of the oppressed.

Is it really such an, either or, world that you live in?

 

[agricola]

You do know this is the USA we are discussing don't you?

This isnt an argument about rendition, its about them apparently using a legal process which even a casual look at their legal history confirms would be doomed to failure.

 

[butchersapron]

and more besides . Why would he want to protect a nonce do you reckon ?

I didn't realise that he was there that night.

 

[Mr.Bishie]

I had to pop out so missed the balcony drivel. Did anyone throw something at him?

 

[Deareg]

This isnt an argument about rendition, its about them apparently using a legal process which even a casual look at their legal history confirms would be doomed to failure.

many people around the world disagree with you.

 

[butchersapron]

Is it really such an, either or, world that you live in?

Sorry, this either world is the world that the argument of the bigger picture arguments live in. But in the dark, in the shadows, unable to openly come out and state the logic of their positions.

 

[elbows]

I had to pop out so missed the balcony drivel. Did anyone throw something at him?

Their naive hopes & aspirations.

 

[smmudge]

Ok, here's where - where you suggest that he shouldn't if he fears being extradited to the US.I think he should even if he fears being extradited. Do you?

Where have I suggested that he shouldn't go if he fears being extradited to the US? I've only been arguing that he has a right to fear extradition to the US; of course he should go to Sweden regardless - I've said that many times before.

 

[cesare]

You know that it's not the issue don't you? Every attempt to reduce this down to Assnage vs the US, of perfidious albion vs the whole of latin america cuts the rape allegations away from this whole issue. It effectively says, fuck that shit, only the bigger picture counts.

Yeah. If they (US) are desperate to get him, they could do it just as easily from here. Plus Sweden's convictions for rape prosecutions are only about 10% anyway, so there's approx 90% chance he'd get acquitted in Sweden.

Smoke and mirrors from Assange to avoid answering the sex offence allegations, imo. Ugh.

 

[Deareg]

Sorry, this either world is the world that the argument of the bigger picture arguments live in. But in the dark, in the shadows, unable to openly come out and state the logic of their positions.

I have stated my position so have others, you choose to either ignore them or put your own interpretation on our words.

 

[agricola]

many people around the world disagree with you.

On many issues no doubt.

 

[butchersapron]

Where have I suggested that he shouldn't go if he fears being extradited to the US? I've only been arguing that he has a right to fear extradition to the US; of course he should go to Sweden regardless - I've said that many times before.

Have you? When you've argued differently for many months all the time you meant that he should go to sweden, not fight the EAW, not seek aslyum in the Ecuadoran embassy regardless of whether he may be extradited to the US?

 

[smmudge]

Have you? When you've argued differently for many months all the time you meant that he should go to sweden, not fight the EAW, not seek aslyum in the Ecuadoran embassy regardless of whether he may be extradited to the US?

Many months? I only started taking any notice of this around the end of June. I think you must be thinking of someone else.

 

[MAD-T-REX]

When would the US have asked the UK for his extradition?

The US could have put in their request between his arrival in the UK and the magistrate ordering his extradition in early 2011 (the Home Secretary could have given it priority over the Swedish EAW until the extradition order was made).

 

[1%er]

Anyone have any thoughts as to why Balthasar Garcon has agreed to act as his legal advisor in this case . Sexual assaults usually arent his thing . is it just another case of Johnny Dago foreigner giving blighty the 2 fingers , as has been suggested about the Ecuadoreans and others on this thread.

Dago is a racist term, it is interesting that some people are pulled up for language such as this and other are not. I guess posters here believe some ethnic origins are more equal than others, a more worthy cause.

 

[doddles]

You know that it's not the issue don't you? Every attempt to reduce this down to Assnage vs the US, of perfidious albion vs the whole of latin america cuts the rape allegations away from this whole issue. It effectively says, fuck that shit, only the bigger picture counts.

Here we go. I'm going to try to state this in really simple terms so that you have no excuse to put words/meanings into my mouth:
i) Assange should definitely face sexual crimes accusations. Personally I believe he should be extradited to Sweden.

but

ii) This whole fucking mess has been brought about by the UK and Swedish governments watering down protections for individuals, thus giving Assange and his supporters (and much of the general public) a reason to doubt whether Assange would really be safe from politically motivated extradition to the USA

OK?

Now, as to your statements suggested that the EAW is equivalent to previous extradition agreements, you're wrong. One change with the EAW was the abolition of the requirement on the part of the requesting country to put forward a prima facie case.

That said, I still think he should go to Sweden to answer accusations. This blog is a nice summary of some of the issues:
http://mediaatueablog.net/2011/11/03/assange-keeping-the-issues-separate/

 

[butchersapron]

Here we go. I'm going to try to state this in really simple terms so that you have no excuse to put words/meanings into my mouth:
i) Assange should definitely face sexual crimes accusations. Personally I believe he should be extradited to Sweden.

but

ii) This whole fucking mess has been brought about by the UK and Swedish governments watering down protections for individuals, thus giving Assange and his supporters (and much of the general public) a reason to doubt whether Assange would really be safe from politically motivated extradition to the USA

OK?

Now, as to your statements suggested that the EAW is equivalent to previous extradition agreements, you're wrong. One change with the EAW was the abolition of the requirement on the part of the requesting country to put forward a prima facie case.

That said, I still think he should go to Sweden to answer accusations. This blog is a nice summary of some of the issues:
http://mediaatueablog.net/2011/11/03/assange-keeping-the-issues-separate/

Ok, you've replied to another post directed to another poster. I haven't tried to put anything in your mouth. (and sorry, were you earlier posts in sort of language above mere mortals? Can you let us know when you're doing that please). I've responded to your - frankly irrelevant - posts about the EAW and the UK/US extradition treaty - asked you why you felt that this was important then responded to your posts.

And no, it hasn't been brought about by this at all - assange would not have submitted under any system of extradition - even one designed by you. It's not down to the extradition processes being shit at all. If you think whole thing is driven by public doubt then you're well off the pace. Doesn't come into it.

There is now an assumption that a prima facie case has been established and followed through in the requesting country - hence the requirement for evidence of an enforceable judgment or executable warrant. That means that in the EU the old rules have been followed. Means nothing beyond that case being established elsewhere first.

 

[butchersapron]

In the article linked to by doddles there's yet another nail in the coffin of the idea that assange would be more eaasily extradited to the US from sweden than the UK:

And are Sweden really more likely to extradite Assange to the US than we are in the UK? It seems unlikely, as Andy Greenberg’s report in Forbes suggests. The UK doesn’t have a good record in resisting such requests – and given all the publicity it seems highly unlikely that the Swedish would let such a thing happen on their watch. Moreover, the Swedish system would require dual criminality for an extradition to occur – that is, the offence committed has to be a crime both in the country seeking extradition and in Sweden itself. Assange’s ‘offenses’ would not easily be shoehorned into that description. Either way, it’s hard to see an extradition occurring from Sweden – extradition from the UK seems far more likely.

 

[doddles]

I've responded to your - frankly irrelevant - posts about the EAW and the UK/US extradition treaty - asked you why you felt that this was important then responded to your posts.

And no, it hasn't been brought about by this at all - assange would not have submitted under any system of extradition - even one designed by you.

That's your judgement and you're entitled to it. But unless you have some pretty fantastic means of mind reading, it remains just that. An opinion. One that is shared by a lot of people, but also not shared by a lot of people.

It's not down to the extradition processes being shit at all. If you think whole thing is driven by public doubt then you're well off the pace. Doesn't come into it.

The limited amounts of credibility that Assange and Equador have is due to the doubts that exist in a sizable number of well informed, otherwise sensible people about the ability of the USA to stretch their hands around the world and grab people they find difficult/dangerous and lock them up, and the willingness of our own politicians to help them. I don't know that that's the case in this instance, but quite a few people are willing to entertain the thought that it *might* be.

I'm very glad for you that you can be so 100% certain about all of these things. It must be wonderful to have such a capacity to see through complex issues so totally convinced that you're right. Some of us see the world as a more complicated place - take pity on us for our intellectual weakness.

 

[butchersapron]

That's your judgement and you're entitled to it. But unless you have some pretty fantastic means of mind reading, it remains just that. An opinion. One that is shared by a lot of people, but also not shared by a lot of people.


The limited amounts of credibility that Assange and Equador have is due to the doubts that exist in a sizable number of well informed, otherwise sensible people about the ability of the USA to stretch their hands around the world and grab people they find difficult/dangerous and lock them up, and the willingness of our own politicians to help them. I don't know that that's the case in this instance, but quite a few people are willing to entertain the thought that it *might* be.

I'm very glad for you that you can be so 100% certain about all of these things. It must be wonderful to have such a capacity to see through complex issues so totally convinced that you're right. Some of us see the world as a more complicated place - take pity on us for our intellectual weakness.

Come on, ffs.

 

[smmudge]

The US could have put in their request between his arrival in the UK and the magistrate ordering his extradition in early 2011 (the Home Secretary could have given it priority over the Swedish EAW until the extradition order was made).

Why would the US want to rush to finalise a case and extradition order for Assange knowing that another country (who are also quite happy to accommodate them) have already issued an arrest warrant for him?

 

[butchersapron]

Why would the US want to rush to finalise a case and extradition order for Assange knowing that another country (who are also quite happy to accommodate them) have already issued an arrest warrant for him?

Why would they have to rush it? So you're saying the US doesn't want him?

And they didn't know that there was a EAW for him - because there wasn't.

Jesus christ.

 

[butchersapron]

Can we get some fucking rigour - chronological or otherwise here?

 

[smmudge]

Why would they have to rush it? So you're saying the US doesn't want him?

And they didn't know that there was a EAW for him - because there wasn't.

Jesus christ.

They knew when they were still trying to get evidence against him/wikileaks in December 2010, and given that the investigation appears recently to still be on going it would have been a rush at that stage.

 

[cesare]

Can we get some fucking rigour - chronological or otherwise here?

There's a timeline here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11949341