U.S. refuses to recognize diplomatic asylum of WikiLeaks founder

reply to post by Xcathdra


Sweden closed the sex charge case in 2010, citing there was a belief that he had no case to answer for. Why was it reopened recently? Was Sweden pressured?

I can counter your Ecuador statement be asking you this, why do people fleeing places like Sri Lanka and Sudan seek asylum is countries like Australia, considering as you put it, Australia has nothing to do with the conflict? It’s their right to seek asylum elsewhere when they fear for their lives, just like it should be Assange’s right to seek political asylum when he fears such a situation that is happening, rightly or wrongly. He’d be a fool to go to a country that has an abused any extradition treaty with the US, hence why he won’t accept “help” from Australia. Ecuador has an extradition treaty with the US, but if it’s understood the seeker is a political prisoner they will not hand him over. A lot of countries have such a treaty, but many abuse it whereas Ecuador does not.

rt.com...

Have a read. If you were in the same situation (or one similar), what would your own actions be? The answer to the last question they ask is interesting, but also the fact that Assange made himself available to be questioned on these charges for two years. Why didn’t Sweden take him up on this?

I'd be happy for Assange to stand trial in Sweden once the women involved stand trail for the criminal liability of destroying evidence. The case is a joke and is nothing more than a stepping stone to the US.

All he's done is reveal REAL documents and broke a dinger……
If some of you think that this is criminal enough to be extradited etc, you deserve what's coming. Wikileaks have released all this info for the good of humanity so I fail to see why some of you are backing the other team… What have they ever done for humanity?

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
I think that even if he does get a free pass to Ecuador or goes to Sweden with an iron clad promise the wont be extradited to the USA he's either going to get assassinated or kidnapped by an illegal extradition team.

Does that position take into account the number of people that have been killed because of Assange and the wikileaks release?

I know there were lots of teeth gnashed and wails cried about this subject when the leaks first happened.....did anyone ever actually positively tie any such casualties to the leaks?

After all if we point out the lack of credible evidence for chemtrails, illuminati, reptilians, etc., then there's no reason not to ask fo the actual evidence of this claim too.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by BlindBastards
This case is a bit ridiculous. What crime has he committed on US soil?

I think this says it well...
www.wsws.org...

He does not have to be on US soil to violate certain US laws, specially when it comes to clasified information.
It would be one thing if Pvt. Manning was the only person involved however since he was not and wikileaks is the entity that received the stolen documents you move into a conspiracy type situation. There are also unanswered questions about the software provided to Manning that allowed him to encrypt as well as bypass the security filters on the military network he emailed the info from. If that software was provided by individuals linked to wikileaks it changes the scop of the investigation tino wikileaks.


What I find ironic is the amount of irritation people are placing on the US response to the Asylum request. Taking your own comment as an example, my question to you is what does the US have to do with Assange, the sex claims and Sweden requesting his extradition?

Why did Ecquador involve itself in a situation it has nothing to do with? These incidents took place outside of Ecquadors political boundaries so using your argument why are they invovled? None of this occured in Ecquador.

edit on 18-8-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

No incorrect. He has committed no crime regarding the US. Manning was recently tortured in an attempt to get him to say he conspired with Assange but to this date he has not. Outside of fabrication of evidence there is nothing to charge him with currently.

Espionage is what Manning will be tried with b/c he is a US citizen. Assange is not.

Assange is subject to similar laws which failed when attempting to prosecute the NY Times when publishing leaked information. However is less subject b/c unlike NY times he is not a citizen.

The US, short of torturing Manning to say he was involved, will have to create the law or grotesquely interpret current law.

Assange has committed no crime. However the old joke is that you can indict a bologna sandwich. There have been grand juries meeting. So will see.

Wikileaks goes to great lengths in redacting the documents released. They have even asked for the US to help. US refused. Major papers have assisted in the past.

No deaths have been tied. No one has shot the messenger yet.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
I think that even if he does get a free pass to Ecuador or goes to Sweden with an iron clad promise the wont be extradited to the USA he's either going to get assassinated or kidnapped by an illegal extradition team.

Does that position take into account the number of people that have been killed because of Assange and the wikileaks release?

I know there were lots of teeth gnashed and wails cried about this subject when the leaks first happened.....did anyone ever actually positively tie any such casualties to the leaks?

After all if we point out the lack of credible evidence for chemtrails, illuminati, reptilians, etc., then there's no reason not to ask fo the actual evidence of this claim too.

London grants asylum....

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Does that position take into account the number of people that have been killed because of Assange and the wikileaks release?

Nothing compares to the murder done in the name of US interests in the last century.

The US war machine is a beast that must be put down for the good of us all.

Iraq, years later: www.abovetopsecret.com...

That is the legacy of your noble lies.

So the US doesn't recognize international law...at least when it doesn't apply to them. Remember the Chinese dissident a few months ago? The US was so intent about getting that man to the US...and probably helped him escape to the American embassy in China. The US government is full of liars, cheaters and hypocrites. My government is NOT above any law.

America is the spoiled fat kid screaming on the play ground because he can't wait in line for the monkey bars...

What do you people really expect? The law is slanted to fit whatever purpose the demon lawyer is motivated to go after.

Ah lawyers........

The US government only recognizes whatever is convenient for itself.
The following image is external content and pretty much sums it all up.

One has to wonder two things about this, firstly why have they (the US and us Brits) got such a hard on over this bloke. Ok he's published embarrassing details and remotely secret stuff but with Obama publicly chatting and bragging about the the way HE took down Bin Laden and then gave chapter and verse about procedures and operation tactics that should NEVER have been released its a mini game to see who out of the pair has put more lives at risk.

Most of what came from Wikileaks has just detailed the way the US government thinks and acts about people it calls their allies and of course the nasty little ways it treats its citizens but the US admin has waded through it with just egg on their face in all honesty.

So, what makes him such a hot ticket to want to bang up, could this man know a lot more than is being told, could this man and his teams had access to far higher and much more sensitive documents?

Will they kill him?

Possibly but the world would be waiting for that, sudden medical conditions such as instant heart attacks or crashing air craft would be a give away regardless of the proof.

My guess is he's got some serious leverage on the US and Brits..

Originally posted by UDHR19
The US government only recognizes whatever is convenient for itself.
The following image is external content and pretty much sums it all up.

edit on 19-8-2012 by UDHR19 because: (no reason given)

Very true...

Shocking in all honesty..Our Mr Blair should be added to that picture...

reply to post by PhoenixOD


The USA bombs countries in the name of freedom. Yet fills prisons with her own. She bombs countries for not abiding by international laws.. Yet refused to recolonize them herself.... The fourth estate is falling..

Dang dont shoot JA he is just the messenger.. Why dont they arrest some of the criminals he has exposed....

If anyone is interested, I've just read that Assange will be making a statement from the Ecuadorian embassy in about 15 minutes (or at least I believe so..1300 GMT = 8am eastern US time, right?) I've yet to figure out where any streaming sources are online for this, but The Guardian has a live blog rolling for it right now here:
www.guardian.co.uk...

EDIT: One live stream is here, but they seem to be having issues:
www.ustream.tv...


EDIT 2: Found the Reuters stream:
reuters.livestation.com...

And if I heard correctly, the statement time has been bumped back to 1330 GMT.

www.ustream.tv...

IT'S NOT EVEN PLAUSIBLE that this Live Feed is having Difficulties.. Not even. This has been prepped for days. At the word that Julian would speak. Carte blanche was given and every expedient asset put in place to air this event. It is being blocked..... there is no other cause. It 'might' be broadcast once it has been EDITED by TPTB. Anyone thinking otherwise is...... well decide for yourself. This is World Stage, not just some local breaking news clip. The true Evil of the TPTB and their puppets the media is on screen for all to view..... right now. Once again, interests will be protected, you couldn't have the true Perp's exposed.

How many people have been killed because of wikileaks releases? Directly linked or even indirectly.

reply to post by talklikeapirat


The usual pathetic argument. How many people, you ask, have been harmed from the releasing of "classified" documents regarding an ILLEGAL invasion and OCCUPATION for the past ELEVEN years involving the deaths of MILLIONS?

No-one, the near-endless casualty list is on the side of Assange's oppositional powers, they are the ones who have killed, tortured and maimed with their tyrannical manipulation of information.

How many people do you think have died because of wikileaks releases?

reply to post by talklikeapirat


Who on Earth would that be? Let's think about it; who could possibly die because of documents pertaining to actions that were already carried out and well known to the ground forces of both sides? Assuming you are thinking of some fantastical notion of Afghan gunmen attacking Coalition troops "all of a sudden" because they "read about wikileaks online".

Originally posted by Plotus
www.ustream.tv...

IT'S NOT EVEN PLAUSIBLE that this Live Feed is having Difficulties.. Not even. This has been prepped for days. At the word that Julian would speak. Carte blanche was given and every expedient asset put in place to air this event. It is being blocked..... there is no other cause. It 'might' be broadcast once it has been EDITED by TPTB. Anyone thinking otherwise is...... well decide for yourself. This is World Stage, not just some local breaking news clip. The true Evil of the TPTB and their puppets the media is on screen for all to view..... right now. Once again, interests will be protected, you couldn't have the true Perp's exposed.

Heh, I believe the difficulties were linked to people trying to call the streamer, or at least that's how I understood his explanation & pleas for calls to cease for now

RT also has a live stream up that I just found, of very good quality:
rt.com...

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Many seem to be suggesting, and in fairness this is general, that this whole situation isn't really about the U.S. wanting Assange, which is silly to say. That's what all of this is ultimately about. The British want rid of him..and I'm sure they won't care or want to care what happens to him the moment he's off their soil. Sweden likely doesn't actually want him any more than anyone else while we're hunting.

Why should they care? Their involvement is to the extent of the extradition and nothing else. Its an internal matter for Sweden is it not?

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Well, up to his eyeballs in what? I agree that he did break U.S. Laws. Treason isn't among them...he's not a citizen and reading case precedent does seem to establish that as a necessary element...

There are 3 types of treason in the US.
* - Military which is governed by the UCMJ
* - Federal domestic
* - State domestic

Each one has their own criteria. Military applies to military, Federal applies to individuals who violate Federal law and State for those who violate the state laws. One of the main requirements is the person must have an allegiance = US citizen. In a hypothetical if Assange were a US citizen he would not face the same criteria that manning would. He would fall under federal.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
but he did violate laws. We can stand on textbook thinking and say all law breakers must be punished and if we let one exception go then where does it stop, or something......or be realistic and just ask what is so important that THIS one be chased to the ends of the Earth?

Investigating and chased are not the same thing. In this case a clear connection from Manning to Assange would need to be established and then it would need to establish the extent of each others involvement. While its relatively easy to charge a person with espionage it takes on a whole new level when there is a possibility of conspiracy. Those cases require more direct evidence than if it were not a conspiracy.

Secondly the US has gone after individuals in the past who were accused of spying / espionage / law violations etc. What makes this different is the actions of wikileaks and the amount of material that was published.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
THIS one crapped all over Hillary Clinton, personally...as it happens in the subject of so many cables. He crapped all over Obama and Bush and a number of Military commanders who've already been burned or lightly crisped from things that came from Wikileaks. What *ELSE*, outside personal grudges and stomped feelings....make this one so critical to go through so much for? Obama COULD be the bigger guy and show some discretion for a change. It might even get him a vote or two.....

So its ok to prosecute manning for a crime but not assange? What makes assange different that he requires special treatment? As for votes Obama cannot capitalize by letting manning go. The number of leaks that have come out of this administration about Iran / Israel / Bin laden raid / etc etc etc already have pissed the population off. Add in "amnesty" or what have you wont go well at all.

Is there any reason Assange could not be the bigger person? He had every opprotunity to not release the items, knowing full well it was a violation of US law to do so. Assange could have limited his actions to their stated purpose, to expose government corruption and illegal activities, yet he opted to ignore that and instead buried any criminal wrongdoing under a mountain of documents that show no illegal activity by the US.

That alone should riase questions about Assanges motives.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
The fact is.... Manning did it. We DO have HIM. Oh...do we have him good too...

Assange was just the 'worst' of the Media Manning ran the packages to for how it was released.

If you drive your friend to a bank, where he robs it while you wait in the car, why are you also charged with the crime? Its because even though you knew the actions of your buddy were illegal you opted to stay and help. You knew a criminal action was going to take place and did nothing to stop / report it.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Oh this is just outrageous to even use the word rape. The fact it's the word used in Swedish law is the only reason I don't use another term more fitting to the "crime" he hasn't even been charged with yet. Dishonesty in bed would be more accurate.

Again, Swedish law, not what you or I personally think about Swedish law.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
When the "victim" herself is directly quoted as saying the time together was 100% consensual, enjoyable and freely joined in, rape just leaves my American mind as being a word to even use.....period. He apparently wasn't as honest as she'd have appreciated....and quite literally in the words of the "accuser", that really is all this crap is about..................and getting Assange into the jackpot for a yank to the United States, of course.

In case people forget its an investigation into what occured. Assanges legal challenges are based on completely irrelavent theories.

Do you honestly think the world would remain quiet if the US "kidnapped" assange / had him killed? Those arguments in this case, to me, are based on paranoia and nothing more.

Exposing criminal activites - no problem
Prosecuting those activities - no problem
Manning and Assange went beyond reporting criminal activities and both should be held accountible. Not every single item released documented criminal wrong doing.and because of that laws were violated.

Why is it ok to play favorities?