[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Exactly. I don't see Sweden as interested in the US issues. As we speak the world is divided in political blocks. The asian block is getting stronger and stronger and western governments are feeling the pressure. The US and Europe has been allies for a long time, from now on I think the ties will just get stronger to counter the power of China and its allies. That's no secret that's the sociopolitical makeup of the world. So of course Sweden will mostly do what US asks of them, their economy and political relevance depends greatly on the US support not to mention that Sweden will be representing an even bigger block which is the European Union. I dont know about that. The US and Europe are very different and arent always on the best of terms. I highly doubt Sweden would just "do what the US wants it to do". I'm sure if that was the case, we'd being seeing leaks all over about how swedish officials are upset with being forced to do this. They are probably upset ok but I don't think they have much choice. The US has so much influence that managed to change Switzerlands neutral policy to intervene their banks against Wikileaks. If those things depended on how much a country likess another alone that wouldn't have happened.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] That's supposition though. That's what political analysts say. The world is no longer about countries but mostly about economic and political powers. Why do you think that even Taiwan and Japan is getting closer to China? is it because they like them? of course not but the political and economic power Asia represents as a block is something difficult to let pass. We have to be aware of the big picture to understand such things. This is not about Sweden and US alone. That doesn't mean Sweden is going to hand over Assange. I don't see the Swedish as particularly interested in the US and Wikileaks. The US and Sweden aren't close allies and they aren't enemies. I doubt that will change any time soon. Seems more to be a reason for Assange to avoid court than anything else. Oh they're interested. The world economic and political world is interconnected. Whatever they respond to the US has political and economic consequences for them.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] As we speak the world is divided in political blocks. The asian block is getting stronger and stronger and western governments are feeling the pressure. The US and Europe has been allies for a long time, from now on I think the ties will just get stronger to counter the power of China and its allies. That's no secret that's the sociopolitical makeup of the world. So of course Sweden will mostly do what US asks of them, their economy and political relevance depends greatly on the US support not to mention that Sweden will be representing an even bigger block which is the European Union. I dont know about that. The US and Europe are very different and arent always on the best of terms. I highly doubt Sweden would just "do what the US wants it to do". I'm sure if that was the case, we'd being seeing leaks all over about how swedish officials are upset with being forced to do this. They are probably upset ok but I don't think they have much choice. The US has so much influence that managed to change Switzerlands neutral policy to intervene their banks against Wikileaks. If those things depended on how much a country likess another alone that wouldn't have happened.If we use your logic than it makes no sense that Ecuador would grant the asylum.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] That's what political analysts say. The world is no longer about countries but mostly about economic and political powers. Why do you think that even Taiwan and Japan is getting closer to China? is it because they like them? of course not but the political and economic power Asia represents as a block is something difficult to let pass. We have to be aware of the big picture to understand such things. This is not about Sweden and US alone. That doesn't mean Sweden is going to hand over Assange. I don't see the Swedish as particularly interested in the US and Wikileaks. The US and Sweden aren't close allies and they aren't enemies. I doubt that will change any time soon. Seems more to be a reason for Assange to avoid court than anything else. Oh they're interested. The world economic and political world is interconnected. Whatever they respond to the US has political and economic consequences for them. Back we come to your assumptions without proof. Which I did ask you for dude....
[QUOTE="Abbeten"]Your evidence of his wrongdoing is 'why is he hiding if he's innocent?' That is not sufficient to satisfy burden of proof. You need actual concrete evidence other than 'HE LOOKS SHIFTY. HE'S CLEARLY GUILTY.' You can THINK he's hiding something, that's fine. But the fact that a person is hiding is not and has never been sufficient to bring that person to trial. airshocker
I never said it was sufficient to bring him in for trial. Sufficient enough to question him, certainly. He's obviously hiding something.
He needs to be extradited to Sweden, and then the US, or vice versa. He should stand trial in both countries for the crimes he's committed.
airshocker
What do you think he should be brought to trail for then?
[QUOTE="seahorse123"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Dude what are you on? Because I think Sweden has a right to take Assange to trial I'm a hypocrite? Are you using big words that you don't know the meaning of here?LJS9502_basic
So that's the only reason the rape case YES or NO I think I've told you that several times. This thread is about Sweden and the rape case. Period. ahhhh you got nothing accept the rape case
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="sonicare"] I dont know about that. The US and Europe are very different and arent always on the best of terms. I highly doubt Sweden would just "do what the US wants it to do". I'm sure if that was the case, we'd being seeing leaks all over about how swedish officials are upset with being forced to do this. They are probably upset ok but I don't think they have much choice. The US has so much influence that managed to change Switzerlands neutral policy to intervene their banks against Wikileaks. If those things depended on how much a country likess another alone that wouldn't have happened.If we use your logic than it makes no sense that Ecuador would grant the asylum. Ecuador is part of the Latinamerican block which is getting closer to China than to the US and Europe. In fact what happened with economic instances like Mercosur shows that Latinamerica is trying to detach itself from the western anglosphere.
[QUOTE="seahorse123"]So that's the only reason the rape case YES or NO seahorse123
I think I've told you that several times. This thread is about Sweden and the rape case. Period. ahhhh you got nothing accept the rape caseYou mean except? WTF did you think this thread was about?
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] That doesn't mean Sweden is going to hand over Assange. I don't see the Swedish as particularly interested in the US and Wikileaks. The US and Sweden aren't close allies and they aren't enemies. I doubt that will change any time soon. Seems more to be a reason for Assange to avoid court than anything else. Oh they're interested. The world economic and political world is interconnected. Whatever they respond to the US has political and economic consequences for them. Back we come to your assumptions without proof. Which I did ask you for dude.... What proof have you shown again?
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] They are probably upset ok but I don't think they have much choice. The US has so much influence that managed to change Switzerlands neutral policy to intervene their banks against Wikileaks. If those things depended on how much a country likess another alone that wouldn't have happened.If we use your logic than it makes no sense that Ecuador would grant the asylum. Ecuador is part of the Latinamerican block which is getting closer to China than to the US and Europe. In fact what happened with economic instances like Mercosur shows that Latinamerica is trying to detach itself from the western anglosphere. China is dependent on the western bloc for exports.
[QUOTE="seahorse123"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I think I've told you that several times. This thread is about Sweden and the rape case. Period.LJS9502_basic
ahhhh you got nothing accept the rape caseYou mean except? WTF did you think this thread was about? Julian Assange... got anything else tell me in PM:) I will be waiting for another reason
[QUOTE="seahorse123"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="seahorse123"] ahhhh you got nothing accept the rape caseYou mean except? WTF did you think this thread was about? Julian Assange... got anything else tell me in PM:) I will be waiting for another reasonThat's the second time you've asked me to PM you. Talking with you in threads is painful enough....not prolonging it in a PM. Sorry.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]If we use your logic than it makes no sense that Ecuador would grant the asylum.LJS9502_basic
Ecuador is part of the Latinamerican block which is getting closer to China than to the US and Europe. In fact what happened with economic instances like Mercosur shows that Latinamerica is trying to detach itself from the western anglosphere. China is dependent on the western bloc for exports. Yet they are trying to become independent. If they manage to deal with Latinamerica that's close to a 400 million market right there.
[QUOTE="thegerg"][QUOTE="seahorse123"][QUOTE="thegerg"] Why are you so concerned with whether or not one man likes another. He seems to be so bothered about saying his a hypocrite but he does not give a reasonable explanation accept the rape case so I think it's a reasonable thing to askHire an English tutor. It's clear you don't understand the issue at hand, the language barrier may be the issue. Turning into a grammar Nazi? that's when you know you lost just another sheep out of the flock...
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] Ecuador is part of the Latinamerican block which is getting closer to China than to the US and Europe. In fact what happened with economic instances like Mercosur shows that Latinamerica is trying to detach itself from the western anglosphere. China is dependent on the western bloc for exports. Yet they are trying to become independent. If they manage to deal with Latinamerica that's close to a 400 million market right there.They still can't afford to lose the west.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] China is dependent on the western bloc for exports. Yet they are trying to become independent. If they manage to deal with Latinamerica that's close to a 400 million market right there.They still can't afford to lose the west. Yet, the west is also dependent on China that doesn't mean they're not in competition.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] Yet they are trying to become independent. If they manage to deal with Latinamerica that's close to a 400 million market right there.They still can't afford to lose the west. Yet, the west is also dependent on China that doesn't mean they're not in competition. Dependent? I don't know that I'd say that. Sure people want the cheap goods but if Chinese products stop coming in...they'd adapt to the new product price. Now if China loses a market that is a hit on their economy.
[QUOTE="seahorse123"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]You mean except? WTF did you think this thread was about?LJS9502_basic
Julian Assange... got anything else tell me in PM:) I will be waiting for another reasonThat's the second time you've asked me to PM you. Talking with you in threads is painful enough....not prolonging it in a PM. Sorry. Yeah you don't have anything:) as I thought sorry for prolonging the pain but you could of just said yes or no now I have gotten the answer and you have been humiliated:) good day
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]They still can't afford to lose the west.LJS9502_basic
Yet, the west is also dependent on China that doesn't mean they're not in competition. Dependent? I don't know that I'd say that. Sure people want the cheap goods but if Chinese products stop coming in...they'd adapt to the new product price. Now if China loses a market that is a hit on their economy. Having to pay more for a similar good would also be a hit on the American economy.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]They still can't afford to lose the west.LJS9502_basic
Yet, the west is also dependent on China that doesn't mean they're not in competition. Dependent? I don't know that I'd say that. Sure people want the cheap goods but if Chinese products stop coming in...they'd adapt to the new product price. Now if China loses a market that is a hit on their economy. Lol the west is as dependent on China as China is on the west. You're fooling yourself if you think otehrwise. All major US companies have their production in China for a reason.
[QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] Yet, the west is also dependent on China that doesn't mean they're not in competition. Dependent? I don't know that I'd say that. Sure people want the cheap goods but if Chinese products stop coming in...they'd adapt to the new product price. Now if China loses a market that is a hit on their economy. Having to pay more for a similar good would also be a hit on the American economy. Depends. If it puts Americans to work then no...it's a wash. The Americans would have the money to spend on the product. Prior to the loss of import tax for want of a better term...the US economy was fine. Americans worked and stimulated the economy by buying American made product. It was only when cheap goods entered the US that jobs were lost and less money was being spent to stimulate the economy.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] Yet, the west is also dependent on China that doesn't mean they're not in competition. Dependent? I don't know that I'd say that. Sure people want the cheap goods but if Chinese products stop coming in...they'd adapt to the new product price. Now if China loses a market that is a hit on their economy. Lol the west is as dependent on China as China is on the west. You're fooling yourself if you think otehrwise. All major US companies have their production in China for a reason. And if they moved to the US....it would help the US. Period. Outsourcing jobs/overseas manufacturing are major reasons for the economic downturn.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Dependent? I don't know that I'd say that. Sure people want the cheap goods but if Chinese products stop coming in...they'd adapt to the new product price. Now if China loses a market that is a hit on their economy. Having to pay more for a similar good would also be a hit on the American economy. Depends. If it puts Americans to work then no...it's a wash. The Americans would have the money to spend on the product. Prior to the loss of import tax for want of a better term...the US economy was fine. Americans worked and stimulated the economy by buying American made product. It was only when cheap goods entered the US that jobs were lost and less money was being spent to stimulate the economy. The same can be said of China. If China gives consuming power to its population then they wouldn't depend on the west. That doesn't mean it is possible for them to do that. In fact it is as hard for them as the US becoming productively independent now.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Abbeten"] Having to pay more for a similar good would also be a hit on the American economy. Depends. If it puts Americans to work then no...it's a wash. The Americans would have the money to spend on the product. Prior to the loss of import tax for want of a better term...the US economy was fine. Americans worked and stimulated the economy by buying American made product. It was only when cheap goods entered the US that jobs were lost and less money was being spent to stimulate the economy. The same can be said of China. If China gives consuming power to its population then they wouldn't depend on the west. That doesn't mean it is possible for them to do that. In fact it is as hard for them as the US becoming productively independent now.Not quite. China has a vast population but much of it's poor. Hell the people creating the products probably can't afford them.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Dependent? I don't know that I'd say that. Sure people want the cheap goods but if Chinese products stop coming in...they'd adapt to the new product price. Now if China loses a market that is a hit on their economy. Having to pay more for a similar good would also be a hit on the American economy. Depends. If it puts Americans to work then no...it's a wash. The Americans would have the money to spend on the product. Prior to the loss of import tax for want of a better term...the US economy was fine. Americans worked and stimulated the economy by buying American made product. It was only when cheap goods entered the US that jobs were lost and less money was being spent to stimulate the economy. No, it's a net loss. Sure, it might decrease unemployment a little, but it doesn't raise the average wage or anything. The average lower class worker will end up paying more of his or her income for the same goods. There's a reason why basically every economist holds that international trade benefits the economy.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Depends. If it puts Americans to work then no...it's a wash. The Americans would have the money to spend on the product. Prior to the loss of import tax for want of a better term...the US economy was fine. Americans worked and stimulated the economy by buying American made product. It was only when cheap goods entered the US that jobs were lost and less money was being spent to stimulate the economy.LJS9502_basic
The same can be said of China. If China gives consuming power to its population then they wouldn't depend on the west. That doesn't mean it is possible for them to do that. In fact it is as hard for them as the US becoming productively independent now.Not quite. China has a vast population but much of it's poor. Hell the people creating the products probably can't afford them. And the US can't afford to bring their companies home with the wages Chinese workers have. That's why both are dependent.
[QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Abbeten"] Having to pay more for a similar good would also be a hit on the American economy. Depends. If it puts Americans to work then no...it's a wash. The Americans would have the money to spend on the product. Prior to the loss of import tax for want of a better term...the US economy was fine. Americans worked and stimulated the economy by buying American made product. It was only when cheap goods entered the US that jobs were lost and less money was being spent to stimulate the economy. No, it's a net loss. Sure, it might decrease unemployment a little, but it doesn't raise the average wage or anything. The average lower class worker will end up paying more of his or her income for the same goods. There's a reason why basically every economist holds that international trade benefits the economy. The history of the US says otherwise. I didn't say to remove international trade in total by the way. But there are ways to make home grown products more attractive. Or we could continue on as we are and eventually find a rather poor country with a minor percentage of wealthy to foot the bills for all the poor.
[QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Depends. If it puts Americans to work then no...it's a wash. The Americans would have the money to spend on the product. Prior to the loss of import tax for want of a better term...the US economy was fine. Americans worked and stimulated the economy by buying American made product. It was only when cheap goods entered the US that jobs were lost and less money was being spent to stimulate the economy.LJS9502_basic
No, it's a net loss. Sure, it might decrease unemployment a little, but it doesn't raise the average wage or anything. The average lower class worker will end up paying more of his or her income for the same goods. There's a reason why basically every economist holds that international trade benefits the economy. The history of the US says otherwise. I didn't say to remove international trade in total by the way. But there are ways to make home grown products more attractive. Or we could continue on as we are and eventually find a rather poor country with a minor percentage of wealthy to foot the bills for all the poor. How does it say otherwise? The purchasing power of the average household has increased despite wage stagnation, largely due to access to cheap imports from China.
I mean, the employment increase you get from producing it here would be miniscule, since you'd probably just be taking workers from other sectors. Which coincidentally enough would drive up the prices for THOSE products.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] The same can be said of China. If China gives consuming power to its population then they wouldn't depend on the west. That doesn't mean it is possible for them to do that. In fact it is as hard for them as the US becoming productively independent now.Not quite. China has a vast population but much of it's poor. Hell the people creating the products probably can't afford them. And the US can't afford to bring their companies home with the wages Chinese workers have. That's why both are dependent.The problem is you don't understand that Americans can still afford to pay a bit more for the product than they do. So an increase in price isn't a deal breaker in the US. It would just take some adjustment for people...but more people working with purchasing power would spread the money around and it wouldn't matter if personal consumption took a minor dive. I don't see how China could recover at this time from the loss of exports. So I'd say the US is currently in better shape.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Abbeten"] No, it's a net loss. Sure, it might decrease unemployment a little, but it doesn't raise the average wage or anything. The average lower class worker will end up paying more of his or her income for the same goods. There's a reason why basically every economist holds that international trade benefits the economy.Abbeten
The history of the US says otherwise. I didn't say to remove international trade in total by the way. But there are ways to make home grown products more attractive. Or we could continue on as we are and eventually find a rather poor country with a minor percentage of wealthy to foot the bills for all the poor. How does it say otherwise? The purchasing power of the average household has increased despite wage stagnation, largely due to access to cheap imports from China. The history when the US made much of it's own products dude.:| An increase in price but having a larger working base to purchase would insure the economy didn't suffer from the change. What is better....a country that has high unemployment, a displaced middle class becoming more and more part of the poverty or a country with a larger base to purchase items because the country is working?
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] The history of the US says otherwise. I didn't say to remove international trade in total by the way. But there are ways to make home grown products more attractive. Or we could continue on as we are and eventually find a rather poor country with a minor percentage of wealthy to foot the bills for all the poor. How does it say otherwise? The purchasing power of the average household has increased despite wage stagnation, largely due to access to cheap imports from China. The history when the US made much of it's own products dude.:| An increase in price but having a larger working base to purchase would insure the economy didn't suffer from the change. What is better....a country that has high unemployment, a displaced middle class becoming more and more part of the poverty or a country with a larger base to purchase items because the country is working? You mean the history when the average household had way less purchasing power than it currently does? Also the current natural rate of unemployment (recession notwithstanding) isn't different than it has been in the past. Those workers that would have produced these goods that China now produces for us just moved to different sectors. Bringing that manufacturing back here would jack up prices without helping long-term employment.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Not quite. China has a vast population but much of it's poor. Hell the people creating the products probably can't afford them.LJS9502_basic
And the US can't afford to bring their companies home with the wages Chinese workers have. That's why both are dependent.The problem is you don't understand that Americans can still afford to pay a bit more for the product than they do. So an increase in price isn't a deal breaker in the US. It would just take some adjustment for people...but more people working with purchasing power would spread the money around and it wouldn't matter if personal consumption took a minor dive. I don't see how China could recover at this time from the loss of exports. So I'd say the US is currently in better shape. How do you know it will increase only "a little"? and how do you know they can afford it? even companies like Apple say they couldn't afford to stay in the US even when their products are already overpriced. Imagine other companies. I think you're overestimating the capacity of the US to adapt to such a thing. Both China and US will suffer greatly from that.
Good. There was no chance of him getting a fair trial with the enemies he has. I'm disappointed Britain has been so childish so far. I would have liked to thought that as the big brother state, some of the freedom we sacrifice might count for a little less injustice. Apparently not.
[QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Abbeten"] How does it say otherwise? The purchasing power of the average household has increased despite wage stagnation, largely due to access to cheap imports from China. The history when the US made much of it's own products dude.:| An increase in price but having a larger working base to purchase would insure the economy didn't suffer from the change. What is better....a country that has high unemployment, a displaced middle class becoming more and more part of the poverty or a country with a larger base to purchase items because the country is working? You mean the history when the average household had way less purchasing power than it currently does? Also the current natural rate of unemployment (recession notwithstanding) isn't different than it has been in the past. Those workers that would have produced these goods that China now produces for us just moved to different sectors. Bringing that manufacturing back here would jack up prices without helping long-term employment. No. What time frame are you talking? We are wandering way off topic though...:P
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] The history when the US made much of it's own products dude.:| An increase in price but having a larger working base to purchase would insure the economy didn't suffer from the change. What is better....a country that has high unemployment, a displaced middle class becoming more and more part of the poverty or a country with a larger base to purchase items because the country is working? You mean the history when the average household had way less purchasing power than it currently does? Also the current natural rate of unemployment (recession notwithstanding) isn't different than it has been in the past. Those workers that would have produced these goods that China now produces for us just moved to different sectors. Bringing that manufacturing back here would jack up prices without helping long-term employment. No. What time frame are you talking? We are wandering way off topic though...:P Haha true, this is nowhere near the thread title. And I would say over the past forty years or so.
[QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Abbeten"] You mean the history when the average household had way less purchasing power than it currently does? Also the current natural rate of unemployment (recession notwithstanding) isn't different than it has been in the past. Those workers that would have produced these goods that China now produces for us just moved to different sectors. Bringing that manufacturing back here would jack up prices without helping long-term employment. No. What time frame are you talking? We are wandering way off topic though...:P Haha true, this is nowhere near the thread title. And I would say over the past forty years or so. Okay. Roughly the time Reagan removed tariffs and imports became cheaper. Not the time I was talking about. Before that. Anyway...we'll have to agree to disagree and let this topic get back on track. Where is seahorse and his odd fascination with Assange.
alot of numpties in this thread. julian has agreed to answer all questions that sweden police want to ask him but sweden insist on extradition. why not question him in uk? uk being a good little puppy they are, under america orders of course, want to get him to sweden becausesweden isnt signed up to the european charter so when it comes toextradition to the united states on anything that carries the death penalty they are not restricted by european law.
if uk really is that concerned about having a potential rapist in the country why dont they show the same level of commitment to get known terrorist out of the country? this has america written all over it, land of the free haha
i forgot to add this, sweden just want to question him about the rapeaccusations why cant they gurantee he wont be extraditedto america?
"The minister said his government had taken the decision after the authorities in Britain, Sweden and the United States had refused to give guarantees that, if Mr. Assange were extradited to Sweden, he would not then be sent on to America to face other charges."
and about the supposed rape charge, he is accused of unprotected consensual sex, which equates to assault under Swedish law. that country is run my whimps, the 'men' should be ashamed.
Well, it sets a weird precedent that alleged criminals can make demands and special cases of the swedish government. Theres no real reason he should get special treatment, nor should he make demands of the swedish judicial system. Why should the swedish government guarantee him anything beyond due process? They shouldn't.
Ecuadorian embassy in Britain grants Assange asylum. British authorities threaten to revoke diplomatic status of embassy and arrest Assange anway to extradite him to Sweden for rape and assault charges. Ecuador gets pissed at Britain and yells, "colonial times are over". Wonder if this is a job for Soap McTavish?
sonicare
This is obviously escalating. Hopefully, the United Kingdom does not do something so severe as dissolving the Ecuadorian embassy.
Ecuadorian embassy in Britain grants Assange asylum. British authorities threaten to revoke diplomatic status of embassy and arrest Assange anway to extradite him to Sweden for rape and assault charges. Ecuador gets pissed at Britain and yells, "colonial times are over". Wonder if this is a job for Soap McTavish?
sonicare
Britain aren't going to give him safe passage though, so he's not going to get to Ecuador. I kind of agree with my government for once, because it kind of defeats the purpose of extradition if countries can just guarantee diplomatic immunity of a possible criminal through asylum. According to the Guardian however, Edcuador doesn't have the right to keep him at the embassey indefinitely, although the UK Police can't enter it either; I'm not sure how that works exactly.
[QUOTE="BranKetra"] This is obviously escalating. Hopefully, the United Kingdom does not do something so severe as dissolving the Ecuadorian embassy. Would be in-f*cking-sane. Seems like it worked out well for the UK anyway. Any US pressure can be blamed on Ecuador. Very powerful people want Assange dead though. Dead and gone. Reason for the rape charges. The CIA operatives that were hired to pull a Katelyn Faber. Reason for the arrests. Reason for the UK government being played as puppets. Reason for Swedish judges now lost chances of buying a new Bentley. Must be cool to be able to piss off so many elitist c*nts at once. Assange < 3
Well, it sets a weird precedent that alleged criminals can make demands and special cases of the swedish government. Theres no real reason he should get special treatment, nor should he make demands of the swedish judicial system. Why should the swedish government guarantee him anything beyond due process? They shouldn't.
Because this is a special circumstance. Most alleged criminals haven't made the most powerful country in the world extremely angry by leaking embarrassing documents. There's a good chance that rather than giving him due process, the Swedes will just extradite him to America. And that is going to go exceedingly poorly for him.
[QUOTE="MrPraline"]Ecuador +1000 UK -1000 Assange always +1 It is indeed a pretty ballsy move by Ecuador. The rape charges are pretty silly and pretty obviously a means to get him into a place where they can try to throw heavier charges at him. If the biggest intelligence agencies in the world can only come up with him having sex without a condom as his most heinous deed then he's a decent guy. Not even mentioning the lengths Britain is seemingly willing to go to just to arrest a guy for a crime that isn't even a crime in Britain.
Well, it sets a weird precedent that alleged criminals can make demands and special cases of the swedish government. Theres no real reason he should get special treatment, nor should he make demands of the swedish judicial system. Why should the swedish government guarantee him anything beyond due process? They shouldn't.
Because this is a special circumstance. Most alleged criminals haven't made the most powerful country in the world extremely angry by leaking embarrassing documents. There's a good chance that rather than giving him due process, the Swedes will just extradite him to America. And that is going to go exceedingly poorly for him.
plus he has offered to go to sweden ONLY if they can promise him he wont be sent packing to america. sweden have rufused so cant blame him for not wanting to go. and the case itself is very dodgy, the women in question have changed their stories numerous times. if it didnt involve julian it would have been dropped by now.
Log in to comment