General
Thursday, 16 August 2012 22:20
34 Comments
By a Newsnet reporter
The British Government and Ecuador have become embroiled in a major diplomatic spat over Wiki-leaks founder Julian Assange.
The stand-off follows the decision by the South American Republic’s government to grant political asylum to Mr Assange who is facing deportation to Sweden to face allegations of sexual assault.
Mr Assange entered the Ecuadorean embassy in June when on bail claiming he was facing political persecution if extradited from the UK.
However the UK Government’s Foreign Secretary William Hague has today warned that the UK will not grant Assange safe passage out of the country, claiming that the case is not one of political persecution but of an alleged criminal offence.
The announcement followed threats yesterday by the UK government that it might storm the Ecuadorean Embassy, using a little-known 1987 law, in order to seize Mr Assange. The Latin American Government responded by upping the ante saying it would interpret such an action as an act of hostility.
"We want to be very clear, we're not a British colony. The colonial times are over," Ecuadorean Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino said in an angry statement after a meeting with President Rafael Correa.
"The move announced in the official British statement, if it happens, would be interpreted by Ecuador as an unfriendly, hostile and intolerable act, as well as an attack on our sovereignty, which would force us to respond in the strongest diplomatic way,"
The left leaning government is now gathering support in South America against Britain and has called for meetings of regional Foreign Ministers and the hemispheric Organisation of American States.
A statement on its website read:
"We are deeply shocked by British government's threats against the sovereignty of the Ecuadorean Embassy and their suggestion that they may forcibly enter the embassy.
"This is a clear breach of international law and the protocols set out in the Vienna Convention."
Mr Assange, who is from Australia, is wanted for questioning in Sweden after two women alleged he had sexually assaulted them. In May, he lost his fight against extradition, despite not yet having been charged by Swedish police.
The 40-year-old Australian is accused of raping one woman and "sexually molesting and coercing" another in Stockholm in August 2010, but he claims the allegations against him are politically motivated.
Foreign Secretary William Hague has claimed the UK’s pursuit of Assange has nothing to do with his Wikileaks actions.
Assange and his supporters believe that once extradited to Sweden, he will be sent to the USA where he is wanted in connection with the publication of hundreds of confidential US Government files.
However, Sweden’s Fforeign Minister, Carl Bildt, said “our firm legal and constitutional system guarantees the rights of each and every one. We firmly reject any accusations to the contrary.”
In Sweden, the Ecuadorean ambassador was summoned by the Swedish Foreign Ministry to complain about the asylum decision.
Experts have agreed that there is little possibility of Assange fleeing the UK, given that he will be arrested the moment he steps beyond the Embassy perimeter. The Ecuadorean embassy is not a stand-alone compound, but occupies part of a building.
Speculation that he could flee in a diplomatic car, be smuggled out in a container or be granted Ecuadorean Diplomatic Immunity have been dismissed as virtually impossible by legal and diplomatic experts.
Comments
#
2012-08-16 20:58
"The British Government" right now includes Scotlands 9%..... I urge the Scottish government through Newsnet to put clear blue water between what the .."British Government" is now doing on behalf of Barack Obama.
To not do so is to allow the Scottish Government to be tarred with the same brush as the "British Government" .. It might be nothing other than symbollic, a token gesture, perhaps... but we need to emphasise our differences.
What Camerons government is doing is an outrage... and leaves "Britains Embassies" open to retaliation the world over.
To not do so is to allow the Scottish Government to be tarred with the same brush as the "British Government" .. It might be nothing other than symbollic, a token gesture, perhaps... but we need to emphasise our differences.
What Camerons government is doing is an outrage... and leaves "Britains Embassies" open to retaliation the world over.
#
2012-08-16 21:08
Innocent or guilty, if Assange’s rights aren’t upheld then neither are ours: brightgreenscotland.org/.../...
Quote:
Quote:
It leaves his two female accusers bruised and abused not only allegedly by Assange but also by some of Assange’s supporters and by the legal systems and governments of several countries. They deserve justice and we should support genuine efforts to see they get it.
However we should not be prepare to see their plight used by those who would surrender our hard won rights to a government in Washington that preaches one thing at home and pursues an entirely hypocritical line when it suits it abroad.
There’s another victim in all this – the cause of liberty. We’re slowly but surely losing any moral standing we have to take despots around the world to task. Every failing on our parts is used to justify abuses many times worse elsewhere. Our real power comes from our principles. Shame on those who sell them so cheap.
#
2012-08-16 21:22
The most worrying thing is that the UK threatnes to revoke all international law, Vienna Convention etc. to get one man the US wants to neutralise.
I'm no fan of Julian Assange but his fear of political persecution, including life imprisonment or even execution, if he's extradited to the US, is genuine, so Ecuador did right to grant him asylum.
The problem with Assange is, of course, that he, or his website, is exposing mismanagement by the powers that be in several countries. That is why he is hounded, even by UK authorities. The CIA hides their money trail well but maybe it could be tracked down.
And now the UK has a diplomatic problem. I wonder if an independent Scotland would have such a problem.
I'm no fan of Julian Assange but his fear of political persecution, including life imprisonment or even execution, if he's extradited to the US, is genuine, so Ecuador did right to grant him asylum.
The problem with Assange is, of course, that he, or his website, is exposing mismanagement by the powers that be in several countries. That is why he is hounded, even by UK authorities. The CIA hides their money trail well but maybe it could be tracked down.
And now the UK has a diplomatic problem. I wonder if an independent Scotland would have such a problem.
#
2012-08-16 21:49
Hopefully your use of the word "mismanagement" was a mistake?
You obviously meant to say that Assange was exposing murdering and corrupt governments.
You obviously meant to say that Assange was exposing murdering and corrupt governments.
#
2012-08-16 22:08
Was it through Assange.. that we learned of US rendition flight passing through Preswick on their way to Torture?http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/exclusive-cia-torture-plane-lands-1042818
Perhaps not... but Scotlands needs to shoulder its resposibilities .. if we are a part of Britain... then Holyrood is just as responsible for the threat to storm the Ecuador embassy as Westminster is... We need to protest against these outrages committed in our name.
Perhaps not... but Scotlands needs to shoulder its resposibilities .. if we are a part of Britain... then Holyrood is just as responsible for the threat to storm the Ecuador embassy as Westminster is... We need to protest against these outrages committed in our name.
#
2012-08-17 07:10
RJBH
You are reading like a troll.
You make it sound as if the SG did or didn't do something.
We may all suspect what is going on in the background. However the facts are that a criminal investigation is taking place following an accusation by two woman.
It is likely that the CIA are involved but that is not a FACT. The interpretation of the 1987 law is mere bluster highlighting the lack of judgement by those in London.
Stick to the current FACTS - Sweden has requested access to someone accused of a criminal act.
I have suspicions and can, if I chose, air them.A government cannot.
Yesterday and today your posts demand that the SG act.
Unlike the casual comments here they need to deal in hard information not conspiracy theories (which I do tend to see merit in as an individual)
You are reading like a troll.
You make it sound as if the SG did or didn't do something.
We may all suspect what is going on in the background. However the facts are that a criminal investigation is taking place following an accusation by two woman.
It is likely that the CIA are involved but that is not a FACT. The interpretation of the 1987 law is mere bluster highlighting the lack of judgement by those in London.
Stick to the current FACTS - Sweden has requested access to someone accused of a criminal act.
I have suspicions and can, if I chose, air them.A government cannot.
Yesterday and today your posts demand that the SG act.
Unlike the casual comments here they need to deal in hard information not conspiracy theories (which I do tend to see merit in as an individual)
#
2012-08-17 08:29
clootie..you are of course entitled to your own opinion as i am to mine....Yesterday.. "Britain" announced that forcing entry into the Ecuadorian embassy to arrest JA was a possibility...
I cant say I am indiffernt to the fate of JA.. however I regard the threat to attack the Ecuadorian embassy by police or soldiers as an act bordering on threat to war..(I have no idea about treaties etc regarding sancutary in embassies)
I do understand this is outwith the scope of the Scottish government.. but did think it would be appropriate for the SG to make sure that Cameron/Hauge knew that the SG did not support their outrageous line of action.
Being as there has been no official announcement to that effect....one can only assume that has not happened and I/we are left wondering if the SG by its silence... supports the threat to attack the Ecaudorian Embassy.
I cant say I am indiffernt to the fate of JA.. however I regard the threat to attack the Ecuadorian embassy by police or soldiers as an act bordering on threat to war..(I have no idea about treaties etc regarding sancutary in embassies)
I do understand this is outwith the scope of the Scottish government.. but did think it would be appropriate for the SG to make sure that Cameron/Hauge knew that the SG did not support their outrageous line of action.
Being as there has been no official announcement to that effect....one can only assume that has not happened and I/we are left wondering if the SG by its silence... supports the threat to attack the Ecaudorian Embassy.
#
2012-08-17 10:31
Quoting RJBH:
Is there any evidence of this threat? Seem Hague has said the exact opposite yesterday.
Let's not get facts get in the way of a good rant though.
Was it through Assange.. that we learned of US rendition flight passing through Preswick on their way to Torture?http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/exclusive-cia-torture-plane-lands-1042818
Perhaps not... but Scotlands needs to shoulder its resposibilities .. if we are a part of Britain... then Holyrood is just as responsible for the threat to storm the Ecuador embassy as Westminster is... We need to protest against these outrages committed in our name.
Is there any evidence of this threat? Seem Hague has said the exact opposite yesterday.
Let's not get facts get in the way of a good rant though.
#
2012-08-17 19:32
Ecuador has now made its decision: to grant political asylum to Julian Assange. This comes in the wake of an incident that should dispel remaining doubts about the motives behind the UK/Swedish attempts to extradite WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. On Wednesday, the UK government made an unprecedented threat to invade Ecuador's embassy if Assange is not handed over. Such an assault would be so extreme in violating international law and diplomatic conventions that it is difficult to even find an example of a democratic government even making such a threat, let alone carrying it out.
#
2012-08-17 23:41
Quoting RJBH:
Sorry but i don't consider that Evidence. Please bear in mind Ecuador are one of the many sad countries performing the "injured dog" pose with regards to the Falklands. They've already accused the UK of being colonialists just recently.
So i take their reports of a "threat" with a rather large portion of salt. I mean can you really imagine William Hague making a threat anyway?
Ecuador has now made its decision: to grant political asylum to Julian Assange. This comes in the wake of an incident that should dispel remaining doubts about the motives behind the UK/Swedish attempts to extradite WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. On Wednesday, the UK government made an unprecedented threat to invade Ecuador's embassy if Assange is not handed over. Such an assault would be so extreme in violating international law and diplomatic conventions that it is difficult to even find an example of a democratic government even making such a threat, let alone carrying it out.
Sorry but i don't consider that Evidence. Please bear in mind Ecuador are one of the many sad countries performing the "injured dog" pose with regards to the Falklands. They've already accused the UK of being colonialists just recently.
So i take their reports of a "threat" with a rather large portion of salt. I mean can you really imagine William Hague making a threat anyway?
#
2012-08-18 08:31
British threats to invade Ecuador’s embassy will be discussed at international-level talks between the foreign ministers of the Organization of American States. The proposal was adopted despite the US saying OAS has nothing to do with the issue.
Ecuador’s resolution to convene a meeting of the OAS member nations' foreign ministers was adopted with 23 voting in favor, three against and five abstentions.
The US and Canada were among those who opposed the measure, stating that the dispute over Assange's fate is a bilateral matter between Ecuador and the United Kingdom, and should not be dragged to the international table.
I for one want to know the Scottish Governments position on it...
Ecuador’s resolution to convene a meeting of the OAS member nations' foreign ministers was adopted with 23 voting in favor, three against and five abstentions.
The US and Canada were among those who opposed the measure, stating that the dispute over Assange's fate is a bilateral matter between Ecuador and the United Kingdom, and should not be dragged to the international table.
I for one want to know the Scottish Governments position on it...
#
2012-08-19 09:34
Quoting RJBH:
There was no "threat". Ecuador are just trying to make the UK look bad, and you are falling for it.
British threats to invade Ecuador’s embassy will be discussed at international-level talks between the foreign ministers of the Organization of American States. The proposal was adopted despite the US saying OAS has nothing to do with the issue.
Ecuador’s resolution to convene a meeting of the OAS member nations' foreign ministers was adopted with 23 voting in favor, three against and five abstentions.
The US and Canada were among those who opposed the measure, stating that the dispute over Assange's fate is a bilateral matter between Ecuador and the United Kingdom, and should not be dragged to the international table.
I for one want to know the Scottish Governments position on it...
There was no "threat". Ecuador are just trying to make the UK look bad, and you are falling for it.
#
2012-08-16 22:25
No.
English is not my native language but when I wrote mismanagement I meant just that. Mismanaging public assets. As in managing them badly. That's bad enough, and the UK has a long track record of doing that, ever since Thatcher, but murder and corruption aren't as rife in the UK as they are in ex-Soviet countries or the US, so something to be proud about.
English is not my native language but when I wrote mismanagement I meant just that. Mismanaging public assets. As in managing them badly. That's bad enough, and the UK has a long track record of doing that, ever since Thatcher, but murder and corruption aren't as rife in the UK as they are in ex-Soviet countries or the US, so something to be proud about.
#
2012-08-16 22:34
I hope the Ecuadorian government go one step further and issue Mr Assange with an Ecuadorian diplomatic passport. The status of the embassy building itself then becomes moot. In any event, I am not sure that the British goverment truly understands that every British embassy abroad may be treated in the same manner as Ecuador's is here. How many British embassies will be occupied by other states on trumped-up nonsense. Only time will tell.
There is absolutely no reason why Swedish authorities can't interview him at the Ecuador embassy in London, unless of course there is an ulterior motive at work here.
There is absolutely no reason why Swedish authorities can't interview him at the Ecuador embassy in London, unless of course there is an ulterior motive at work here.
#
2012-08-17 09:27
Giving Mr Assange a diplomatic passport will do nothing for him. A diplomatic passport does not, as commonly believed, grant the holder diplomatic immunity.
In order to have diplomatic status, someone has to be accredited by the country they are going to be serving in. I can't see the UK government doing that in this case.
In order to have diplomatic status, someone has to be accredited by the country they are going to be serving in. I can't see the UK government doing that in this case.
#
2012-08-16 22:42
What Mr. Assange has done is expose the lies, corruption and just how cheaply the 'West' regard human rights. If it means showing them up for what they really are, I say well done. Threats to invade the sovereignty of another country is a foretaste of how rogue this state apparatus will become when it comes round to 2014. This threat was for one man and to appease America. Chilling really to think what they will stoop to in order to keep control of Scotland and her resources.
#
2012-08-16 22:54
It would be interesting to know what the views of the Libdems, (as partners in this coalition government), and Labour (as Her Majesty's Opposition at Westminster) are on this issue of UK and international importance. What's the betting that if Alex Salmond commented on this story, they would be falling over themselves to talk to the media and put a negative spin on it?
Why is it that when an issue arises that might be tricky for the Libdems - i.e. Francis Maude's outrageous attacks on public sector workers, Nick Clegg & co are never asked for their views by the BBC?
Why is it that when an issue arises that might be tricky for the Libdems - i.e. Francis Maude's outrageous attacks on public sector workers, Nick Clegg & co are never asked for their views by the BBC?
#
2012-08-16 22:55
OT, but talking of a country gone mad, I've just been asked to provide Advance Passenger Information to enter the UK - I'm a British citizen and they scan my passport every time I enter the country!
Is this just for the Olympics or is the UK now a totalitarian state?
Is this just for the Olympics or is the UK now a totalitarian state?
#
2012-08-18 08:33
Quoting Marga B:
The latter. Although, most countries do the same and the airlines generally apply an "across the board" policy for passengers, regardless of nationality.
OT, but talking of a country gone mad, I've just been asked to provide Advance Passenger Information to enter the UK - I'm a British citizen and they scan my passport every time I enter the country!
Is this just for the Olympics or is the UK now a totalitarian state?
The latter. Although, most countries do the same and the airlines generally apply an "across the board" policy for passengers, regardless of nationality.
#
2012-08-16 23:16
Time to take a chill pill:
Activities of the Foreign Office and the Home Office are outside the remit of the Scottish Government under the current Scotland Act 1998.
If Mr Assange was seeking asylum in a consulate in Edinburgh then it would be a different matter, the Home Office could not act as it would be outwith their jurisdiction and the Foreign Office would have to seek leave from the Court of Session to demonstrate the evidence on which they were wishing to act met Scottish standards of corroborative evidence otherwise the Scottish Police would not be able to arrest Mr Assange.
So the Scottish Government are right not to interfere as to do so creates a reverse Megrahi situation. Individuals can make their feelings clear to Hague but this is a reserved issue. So let's just laugh as Westminster makes yet another cock-up of Megrahi sized stupidity and ask folk if this is really a Union that has any benefits?
Activities of the Foreign Office and the Home Office are outside the remit of the Scottish Government under the current Scotland Act 1998.
If Mr Assange was seeking asylum in a consulate in Edinburgh then it would be a different matter, the Home Office could not act as it would be outwith their jurisdiction and the Foreign Office would have to seek leave from the Court of Session to demonstrate the evidence on which they were wishing to act met Scottish standards of corroborative evidence otherwise the Scottish Police would not be able to arrest Mr Assange.
So the Scottish Government are right not to interfere as to do so creates a reverse Megrahi situation. Individuals can make their feelings clear to Hague but this is a reserved issue. So let's just laugh as Westminster makes yet another cock-up of Megrahi sized stupidity and ask folk if this is really a Union that has any benefits?
#
2012-08-17 00:27
MJM,
As you say, the governmental powers of the Scottish Parliament matter little in this situation, but that is no reason to take a chill pill and ignore what they are trying to do.
Nothing in this worrying manipulaton of international conventions precludes the Scottish Government from taking a stand on this issue and, at the least, issuing a statement about whether they agree or not with Hague's actions.
Scotland's people are still a large constituency. [the punters here in SE England are too. They can't believe what Hague is trying to do either - but they do not have a "separate" voice]
Henry [above] -
Great post - I have concerns about the safety of our FCO staff overseas. Not just in Ecuador but in other, possibly less stable, nations.
As you say, the governmental powers of the Scottish Parliament matter little in this situation, but that is no reason to take a chill pill and ignore what they are trying to do.
Nothing in this worrying manipulaton of international conventions precludes the Scottish Government from taking a stand on this issue and, at the least, issuing a statement about whether they agree or not with Hague's actions.
Scotland's people are still a large constituency. [the punters here in SE England are too. They can't believe what Hague is trying to do either - but they do not have a "separate" voice]
Henry [above] -
Great post - I have concerns about the safety of our FCO staff overseas. Not just in Ecuador but in other, possibly less stable, nations.
#
2012-08-16 23:40
I cannot see Assange being safe in Ecuador either when the Americans have a penchant for sending killer drones into foreign countries.
The American influence in all this is being played down quite strongly on the media tonight.
Two subjects discussed on Newsnicht tonight with a reference to a third. Each of the two would have merited at least twenty minutes of discussion but they were cut off just when it was getting interesting.
Of course the BBC have to leave plenty of spare capeacity on other nights for slagging off the Scottish Government.
The American influence in all this is being played down quite strongly on the media tonight.
Two subjects discussed on Newsnicht tonight with a reference to a third. Each of the two would have merited at least twenty minutes of discussion but they were cut off just when it was getting interesting.
Of course the BBC have to leave plenty of spare capeacity on other nights for slagging off the Scottish Government.
#
2012-08-17 01:51
Remember Cameron standing in the White House telling the world how he dissociated himself from Scotland's decision to repatriate Megrahi?
It's about time the favour was returned by the FM.
It's about time the favour was returned by the FM.
#
2012-08-17 09:16
OT but other international activity, this time by the Yes campaign:
ara.cat/.../...
"You’ve got the people, now you need a strong government"
Scottish representatives urge Catalonia to lose their fear of calling a referendum without permission from Madrid
MARC TORO
"You’ve got the people, now you need a strong government" activist Anna Arqué talked with the Scottish delegation who will participate on Friday in a conference on nations without a state.
When independentists in Scotland and Catalonia look at each other, each sees a reflection of what they themselves lack. The former envy the social majority which surveys say exists in Catalonia in favour of a separate state, and the latter openly crave a government with the determination to push for a referendum in the autumn of 2014 as the starting shot in the process of self-determination that there is in Scotland.
This issue will be debated today with Humza Yousaf, Member of the Scottish Parliament for the Scottish National Party (the party of the First Minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond), Christopher White, director of international relations of the Scottish Independence Convention '('YES Campaign'); Gail Lythgoe, president of the National Federation of Students in Scotland, and John Duffy, president of the Fire Brigades Union Scotland.
All four, brought together by the European Partnership for Independence (EPI), are ambassadors for their nation at a round table of the Catalan Summer University, to explain the details of the Scottish referendum.
ara.cat/.../...
"You’ve got the people, now you need a strong government"
Scottish representatives urge Catalonia to lose their fear of calling a referendum without permission from Madrid
MARC TORO
"You’ve got the people, now you need a strong government" activist Anna Arqué talked with the Scottish delegation who will participate on Friday in a conference on nations without a state.
When independentists in Scotland and Catalonia look at each other, each sees a reflection of what they themselves lack. The former envy the social majority which surveys say exists in Catalonia in favour of a separate state, and the latter openly crave a government with the determination to push for a referendum in the autumn of 2014 as the starting shot in the process of self-determination that there is in Scotland.
This issue will be debated today with Humza Yousaf, Member of the Scottish Parliament for the Scottish National Party (the party of the First Minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond), Christopher White, director of international relations of the Scottish Independence Convention '('YES Campaign'); Gail Lythgoe, president of the National Federation of Students in Scotland, and John Duffy, president of the Fire Brigades Union Scotland.
All four, brought together by the European Partnership for Independence (EPI), are ambassadors for their nation at a round table of the Catalan Summer University, to explain the details of the Scottish referendum.
#
2012-08-17 10:15
Nothing more predictable than the human rights record of Ecuador being traduced on GMS this morning - the presenter found it 'ironic' that Ecuador was offering to protect human rights given their alleged record.
Strangely, the presenter didn't find it 'ironic' that the position of the UK Government/Establishment - that they are legally bound to extradite Assange - is based on the same principles of international law which were casually flouted by the UK Government/Establishment in 2003 leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq.
I'm sure it was just an oversight, eh, you BBC journos?
Strangely, the presenter didn't find it 'ironic' that the position of the UK Government/Establishment - that they are legally bound to extradite Assange - is based on the same principles of international law which were casually flouted by the UK Government/Establishment in 2003 leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq.
I'm sure it was just an oversight, eh, you BBC journos?
#
2012-08-17 19:58
Maybe, but then I've read the same type of comments about this case on sites from across the world. Also, predictably, someone pops on to comment that the comments they are reading are so predictable....
#
2012-08-18 00:06
Ituna, from your post it's difficult to discern what your views on this issue are. Do you think that it would be a good idea for the UK government to set a precedent whereby the sovereignty of a foreign embassy could be compromised to support a fairly routine police investigation by a third country? Do you think that the UK government would have made that same threat if the embassy in question was, say the US embassy?
#
2012-08-17 23:50
It was my understanding the charges in Sweden were dropped and Assange was free to leave. Is this correct, and if so, why the fresh charges?
#
2012-08-18 09:36
the US intend to make life difficult for Assange.. and they will use countries to help them fulfil this aim... and none will be more compliant than the UK.. this of course includes Scotland ...unless of course the SG distance themselves from the actions of the UK government.
#
2012-08-18 13:31
Yes originally the case was dropped by the prosecutor because there was no evidence the allegations had occurred.
Assange waited in Sweeden making himself available for questioning concerning the allegations until he was given leave to go by Sweedish authorities.
The case was then picked up by a different prosecutor after a Sweedish politician intervened and re-opened.
Eventually a European Arrest Warrant was issued Assange, note this is not because he has been found guilty or even charged, just that the Swedish authorities need to question him surrounding the incident as per Swedish judicial system, it is my udnerstanding that he cant be charged until they have questioned him.
When Assange found out about the arrest warrent he turned himself in to the UK police and then all of this happenend.
While I suspect the allegations are politically motivated, the fact is we dont know and probably will never know unless he is questioned by Swedish authorities and either cleared or charged and the matter settled at trial.
The issue with this is if he ends up in Sweden is questioned, he'll most likely be extradicted to the USA to face charges of "treason" and possible execution.
Note it is possible for an Australian citizen to face treason charges in the USA because of a domestically accepted premise that, the USA owns the world.
Assange waited in Sweeden making himself available for questioning concerning the allegations until he was given leave to go by Sweedish authorities.
The case was then picked up by a different prosecutor after a Sweedish politician intervened and re-opened.
Eventually a European Arrest Warrant was issued Assange, note this is not because he has been found guilty or even charged, just that the Swedish authorities need to question him surrounding the incident as per Swedish judicial system, it is my udnerstanding that he cant be charged until they have questioned him.
When Assange found out about the arrest warrent he turned himself in to the UK police and then all of this happenend.
While I suspect the allegations are politically motivated, the fact is we dont know and probably will never know unless he is questioned by Swedish authorities and either cleared or charged and the matter settled at trial.
The issue with this is if he ends up in Sweden is questioned, he'll most likely be extradicted to the USA to face charges of "treason" and possible execution.
Note it is possible for an Australian citizen to face treason charges in the USA because of a domestically accepted premise that, the USA owns the world.
#
2012-08-18 19:19
What do Hague and Straw have in common...... and Pinochet springs to mind?
Their reactions perplex?
Their reactions perplex?
#
2012-08-18 18:09
We have a constituent country in this United Kingdom that sees no problem whatsoever in bombing its former partner nation should the airports of that neighbor prove threatening in the event of potential terrorism. Similarly they see no problem raiding the sovereign territory of a fellow member of the United Nations who happens to have a diplomatic embassay on its soil.
These are the potential actions of a country that I personally would wish to distance meself from.
In terms of a fledgling independent country that already has a government which aspires to be self governing then, from the moment that the declaration towards self determination was made the current Scots Government should have a position on everything and anything that is done by others in our name.
We, Scotland have not had international experience at dilpomatic level for many generations. Now is as good a time to start gaining a voice and especially a voice that sets us apart from our beligerent neighbors.
These are the potential actions of a country that I personally would wish to distance meself from.
In terms of a fledgling independent country that already has a government which aspires to be self governing then, from the moment that the declaration towards self determination was made the current Scots Government should have a position on everything and anything that is done by others in our name.
We, Scotland have not had international experience at dilpomatic level for many generations. Now is as good a time to start gaining a voice and especially a voice that sets us apart from our beligerent neighbors.
#
2012-08-20 01:17
In two years, we will have the choice between taking responsibility for our own actions in the world, or being culpable by association with the ever more extreme actions of an increasingly rogue state.
Donate to Newsnet Scotland
Latest Comments
- Westminster's oil-fund failure...
Ah yes... This should have happened, tha... - Brown facing questions over 's...
I suspect this is the tip of a rather la... - Westminster's oil-fund failure...
There's something very tedious about rec... - Schools top Donside agenda as ...
clootie your final line is spot on: The ... - Westminster's oil-fund failure...
I just cannot understand the mentality o... - Westminster's oil-fund failure...
Steel says: ".....create a separate acco... - Schools top Donside agenda as ...
Nothing on the BBC website about the ele... - Schools top Donside agenda as ...
Labour playing the orange card - whateve... - Brown facing questions over 's...
It appears Mr Brown's government didn't ... - Brown facing questions over 's...
And these are the people whose judgement... - Brown facing questions over 's...
OT Just lifted the following link from M... - Brown facing questions over 's...
Oh my, Gordon Brown's paranoia goes glob... - Brown facing questions over 's...
I'm sure he will make an announcement sh... - More evidence that Scots were ...
bagonails and kenneth_clark336 I NOW PRI... - More evidence that Scots were ...
Agree totally Clootie, I got one today ,... - Trident to go within months ...
Have a look at this Jamie .... somehow I... - The Voices of Tomorrow’s Scotl...
Gerry Hassan wrote, then, Any of the you... - Trident to go within months ...
Lets see - the Scottish Defence Force Na... - Trident to go within months ...
Here's a link to the Whitehall report fr... - More evidence that Scots were ...
Yes! In this digital world the written ...