Cheers, I'll forward that link.

Excellent blog that cod'ead. I think Ecuador will come to regret their decision over time, especially if they allow Assange to continue his self-promoting antics from within their walls. As the following article in The Granuad suggests, Ecuador is hardly a comfortable bedfellow for somebody supposedly worried about freedom of speech: www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/ju ... an-assange I wonder how long they'd let Assange remain if Wikileaks started posting stuff about Ecuador?

Excellent blog that cod'ead. I think Ecuador will come to regret their decision over time, especially if they allow Assange to continue his self-promoting antics from within their walls. As the following article in The Granuad suggests, Ecuador is hardly a comfortable bedfellow for somebody supposedly worried about freedom of speech: www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/ju ... an-assange I wonder how long they'd let Assange remain if Wikileaks started posting stuff about Ecuador?

Has Gazza turned up yet with two fishing rods and a four-pack?

Quote ="Scooter Nik"Cheers, I'll forward that link.'" There's also the following, which includes some interesting information about the alleged offences that comes from Assange's own defence lawyer: edinburgheye.wordpress.com/2012/ ... y-ecuador/ I'd say he definitely has questions to answer. Also interesting that Assange previously tried to gain permanent residence in Sweden specifically because he felt he would be safe from extradition to the USA...

Quote ="Scooter Nik"Cheers, I'll forward that link.'" There's also the following, which includes some interesting information about the alleged offences that comes from Assange's own defence lawyer: edinburgheye.wordpress.com/2012/ ... y-ecuador/ I'd say he definitely has questions to answer. Also interesting that Assange previously tried to gain permanent residence in Sweden specifically because he felt he would be safe from extradition to the USA...

Also a good article in the i today from Owen Jones - basically it says you can support Wikileaks whilst also thinking Assange should be extradited. He also dispels some of the myths in his article such as the one about him not being accused of rape (he is) and that what he's accused of wouldn't constitute rape in this country (the High Court says it would), but also as to why Assange hasn't been charged yet

[iAgain, his supporters query why Sweden has not charged Assange. But that is not how the Swedish legal system works. Defendants are not charged until very late into proceedings and just before prosecution. He cannot be charged until he is arrested, which can only take place in Sweden. The country is a democracy with an independent legal system and is a signatory to the European Convention of Human Rights. [/i

Doesn’t alter the fact that he is perfectly capable of answering questions in this country.

If you felt you were innocent would you travel or willingly comply with an extradition order forcing you to travel from one country to another for a crime you hadn’t been found guilty of? For a crime you had yet to be charged with however late in the day that is done in the Swedish system? When that accusation hasn’t even provided a prima facie case to answer never mind being proved, simply that an accusation has been made and there are simply questions someone wants to ask?

Bradley Manning has been in prison for 800 days without trial because of Wikileaks, would that not make you at least a little nervous?

I heard a very disturbing story today.

Apparently Sweden needs to show no evidence to the UK govt in order to request extradition as part of an EU treaty.

On the face of it, this shouldn't be a problem with a liberal country like Sweden but does the same hold for countries like Romania? Presumably so.

Of course, like most EU rulings there is a list of countries who are not bound by it, France, Germany etc

Strangely enough the UK isn't one of them.

Quote ="XBrettKennyX"I heard a very disturbing story today. Apparently Sweden needs to show no evidence to the UK govt in order to request extradition as part of an EU treaty. On the face of it, this shouldn't be a problem with a liberal country like Sweden but does the same hold for countries like Romania? Presumably so. Of course, like most EU rulings there is a list of countries who are not bound by it, France, Germany etc Strangely enough the UK isn't one of them.'" You might at least [itry[/i checking out these stories before making yourself look daft/gullible. Here - I'll help you out: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Arrest_Warrant No charge.

Quote ="XBrettKennyX"I heard a very disturbing story today. Apparently Sweden needs to show no evidence to the UK govt in order to request extradition as part of an EU treaty. On the face of it, this shouldn't be a problem with a liberal country like Sweden but does the same hold for countries like Romania? Presumably so. Of course, like most EU rulings there is a list of countries who are not bound by it, France, Germany etc Strangely enough the UK isn't one of them.'" You might at least [itry[/i checking out these stories before making yourself look daft/gullible. Here - I'll help you out: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Arrest_Warrant No charge.

Is there any particular reason why Assange should be treated differently than any other person would be in the same circumstances?

Swedish law has been followed to the letter. A valid EAW has been issued. The UK courts have examined the EAW and issues surrounding it in significant detail all the way up to the highest court in the land. Why should Assange be allowed to opt out of a valid legal procedure?

Quote ="Kosh"You might at least [itry[/i checking out these stories before making yourself look daft/gullible. Here - I'll help you out: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Arrest_Warrant No charge.'" He says citing Wikipedia!

Quote ="Kosh"You might at least [itry[/i checking out these stories before making yourself look daft/gullible. Here - I'll help you out: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Arrest_Warrant No charge.'" He says citing Wikipedia!

Quote ="Kosh"You might at least [itry[/i checking out these stories before making yourself look daft/gullible. Here - I'll help you out: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Arrest_Warrant No charge.'" And in any case the post was designed to act as more of a question than a statement. To facilitate discussion if you will. Maybe next time you could find a (decent) source and post the link, rather than post a link to "Wiki" and start hurling abuse.

Quote ="Kosh"You might at least [itry[/i checking out these stories before making yourself look daft/gullible. Here - I'll help you out: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Arrest_Warrant No charge.'" And in any case the post was designed to act as more of a question than a statement. To facilitate discussion if you will. Maybe next time you could find a (decent) source and post the link, rather than post a link to "Wiki" and start hurling abuse.

That's rubbish smokey and you know it. That means no-one can be arrested until after they have been charged, prosecuted and convicted. He has been accused of a very serious crime. A country with a perfectly acceptable legal system, human rights record and corruption record has issued an arrest warrant that complies with the law. Assange has had recourse to UK law, he failed. He then broke UK law. He should be arrested and extradited to Sweden. Anything else about Wikileaks or the US is just guff.

As for Bradley Manning, while I don't think he should be mistreated, I hope he spends a long time in prison. He recklessly put lives at risk. He could have quite easily only released information on despicable things like torture/rendition etc. if he'd just done that he would have had my full support. He didn't. As someone with friends and family serving in the armed forces, I hope he spends a long time in prison. Assuming he did it of course.

Quote ="XBrettKennyX"He says citing Wikipedia!'" Not everything on Wiki is wrong. If you'd prefer a less concise source... europa.eu/legislation_summaries/ ... 167_en.htm They're not exactly uncontroversial, but not for the reasons you listed.

Quote ="XBrettKennyX"He says citing Wikipedia!'" Not everything on Wiki is wrong. If you'd prefer a less concise source... europa.eu/legislation_summaries/ ... 167_en.htm They're not exactly uncontroversial, but not for the reasons you listed.

Quote ="Kosh"Not everything on Wiki is wrong. If you'd prefer a less concise source... europa.eu/legislation_summaries/ ... 167_en.htm They're not exactly uncontroversial, but not for the reasons you listed.'" That's better. Now all you have to do is to drop the personal insults and you will be partaking in a discussion forum in the manner in which it was intended.

Quote ="Kosh"Not everything on Wiki is wrong. If you'd prefer a less concise source... europa.eu/legislation_summaries/ ... 167_en.htm They're not exactly uncontroversial, but not for the reasons you listed.'" That's better. Now all you have to do is to drop the personal insults and you will be partaking in a discussion forum in the manner in which it was intended.

Well I am still none the wiser. There is nothing there that I can see that prevents say Romania from asking for the extradition of a UK national without presenting evidence.

No, he shouldn’t, and I doubt the Swedish authorities would have bothered with the case had it not been Mr Assange who was accused. Hence the Swedish chief prosecutor saying "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape."This is just a straw man argument. I havent said he should be able to opt of a valid legal procedure, (which he hasn’t done by the way, he has simply used a separate legal protection which an independent democratic nation has bestowed on him to protect him from what they class as persecution, im not sure if Ahmed Aguiza and Zery Mohammed would agree with the current narrative of trustworthy ol’ Swedes against those dodgy south Americans) I asked would you be comfortable submitting yourself to this procedure. Would you be comfortable leaving your job, and home and life, to face accusations, that haven’t even been proved on a prima facie basis, which you believe you are innocent of, and you believe are vexatious, and travel to a country complicit in torture and rendition for an ally, the same ally which has held your source for 800 days without trial?

This is the bit that I agree with.

I am no bleeding heart liberal, jeez I have spoken out enough on the pathetic Human Rights Act and how it has fundamentally helped to weaken the Country, but this imo, is fundamental to the number one priority of a Nation State- to protect it's citizens.

Yeah, damn them pesky humans and their constant demands for universal rights.

Nothing wrong with the principle.

It's the application that is at fault.

And haven't Australia been quiet about him...

There isn't. There are, however, conditions under which we could refuse such a request - that's why in the Assange case it went all the way to the Crown Court before it was approved.

There are also no countries that are exempted as you suggested in your post.

There are moves to review the system as some countries are using it for relatively trivial offences which it was never intended to cover. It's far from perfect but our police forces claim it's been of great assistance to them.

That decision was appealed and after due process was reversed. You can make all the claims of ulterior motives that you like, but the fact remains that a valid legal procedure was followed in both Sweden and the UK.


He opted out of a valid legal procedure when he skipped bail. And if you honestly think that Ecuador gives a fig about his human rights, freedom of speech, of freedom from persecution then you clearly haven't been following what they've been up to in their own country.

In any event, it's hardly a valid legal manoeuvre to apply for political asylum when you have not been subjected to political persecution, nor have been charged with a political crime, nor even be under direct threat of either.


I wouldn't be comfortable having carried out the acts that his own defence lawyer says he has. And if he's that 'uncomfortable' with the idea of travelling to Sweden, why did he apply to live there permanently?

Indeed. Mrs 28 worked with the team that did these in Yorkshire and a number of offenders were returned here because of the EAW

Being legal, does not mean being right.

I don’t think anyone at all has argued about the legality of the action so im not sure why it is being brought up?

That decision went through due process and asylum was granted. You can make all the claims of ulterior motives that you like, but the fact remains that a valid legal procedure was followed in Ecuadaor, Sweden and the UK. If you think Sweden is an unimpeachable bastion of democratic process and a shining light of jurisprudence you clearly havent been following what they have been up to in their country.

An independent democratic nation has decided, at the very highest levels that he is being persecuted, It is a valid legal option, and is in fact the only option he would have if the accusations are false and the prosecution vexatious.
That’s another straw man. I can only ask you the question again would you be comfortable submitting yourself to this procedure. Would you be comfortable leaving your job, and home and life, to face accusations, that haven’t even been proved on a prima facie basis, which you believe you are innocent of, and you believe are vexatious, and travel to a country complicit in torture and rendition for an ally, the same ally which has held your source for 800 days without trial?

And you are comfortable with this?