Julian Assange asylum: Ecuador is right to stand up to the US (The Guardian)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/16/julian-assange-asylum-ecuadorThe United States would paint itself as a promoter of human rights, but any right to make that claim is long gone
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.
When Ecuadorian foreign minister Ricardo Patiño, in an angry and defiant response, released the written threats to the public, the UK government tried to backtrack and say it wasn't a threat to invade the embassy (which is another country's sovereign territory). But what else can we possibly make of this wording from a letter delivered by a British official?
"You need to be aware that there is a legal base in the UK, the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987, that would allow us to take actions in order to arrest Mr Assange in the current premises of the embassy. We sincerely hope that we do not reach that point, but if you are not capable of resolving this matter of Mr Assange's presence in your premises, this is an open option for us."
Is there anyone in their right mind who believes that the UK government would make such an unprecedented threat if this were just about an ordinary foreign citizen wanted for questioning – not criminal charges or a trial – by a foreign government?
= new reply since forum marked as read
I hope you enjoy your stay!
Can you explain why you think extradition to the US is "very unlikely"?
Manning told Lamo he passed the Baghdad helicopter attack ("Collateral murder"
video to WikiLeaks shortly after this incident, in February 2010. In April, just as WikiLeaks published the video, Manning sent an e-mail to his master sergeant, Paul Adkins, saying he was suffering from gender identity disorder and attaching a photograph of himself dressed as a woman. Captain Steven Lim, Manning's commander, said he first saw the e-mail after Manning's arrest – when information about hormone replacement therapy was found in his room in Baghdad – and learned that Manning had been calling himself Breanna.[27] Manning told Lamo that his commander had found out about the gender issue before his arrest, after looking at his medical files at the beginning of May. He said he had set up Twitter and YouTube accounts in Breanna's name to give her a digital presence, writing in the Lamo chat: "i wouldn't mind going to prison for the rest of my life, or being executed so much, if it wasn't for the possibility of having pictures of me ... plastered all over the world press ... as [a] boy ... the CPU is not made for this motherboard ..."[28]
On April 30 he posted on Facebook that he was utterly lost, and over the next few days that "Bradley Manning is not a piece of equipment," that he was "beyond frustrated," and "livid" after being "lectured by ex-boyfriend despite months of relationship ambiguity ..." On May 7 he seemed to spiral out of control. According to army witnesses, he was found curled into a fetal position in a storage cupboard, with a knife at his feet, and had cut the words "I want" into a vinyl chair. A few hours later he had an altercation with a female intelligence analyst, Specialist Jihrleah Showman, during which he punched her in the face. The brigade psychiatrist recommended a discharge, referring to an "occupational problem and adjustment disorder." His master sergeant removed the bolt from his weapon, and he was sent to work in the supply office, though at this point his security clearance remained in place. He was demoted from Specialist to Private First Class just two days before his arrest on May 26.[29]
Ellen Nakashima writes that, on May 9, Manning contacted Jonathan Odell, a gay American novelist in Minneapolis, via Facebook, leaving a message that he wanted to speak to him in confidence; he said he had been involved in some "very high-profile events, albeit as a nameless individual thus far." On May 19, according to army investigators, he e-mailed Eric Schmiedl, a mathematician he had met in Boston, and told him he had been the source of the "Collateral Murder" video. Two days later, he began the series of chats with Adrian Lamo that led to his arrest.[30]
end quote.
Yes it was awful for him to hit a woman but I think he was pretty much psychotic when he did.
and handed over two Asylum seekers to be sent to Egypt where they were tortured.
Actions speak louder than words
A country that prided itself on dedication to human rights, shattered that image on behalf of the United States. Fool me once, Sweden, what was it someone infamous once said??
There are no charges against Assange. Not even a charge of speeding. No charges have ever been filed.
I'm glad you're here, where facts are available. Those are two to begin with
by repeating a falsehood. Propaganda, we know that the enemies of Wikileaks wanted to spread the word 'rape' together with his name all over the internet. People here are very informed about this story, it will not impress anyone, other than the small anti-wikileaks contingency, to continue to claim there are charges against Assange.
Even the slightest risk of extradition to the US considering the history of torture and kidnapping etc, especially with elected officials calling for your assassination, considering we now do assassinate people without trial, means no one should ever think of taking such a risk until some day in the future when the rule of law and democracy and habeas corpus have been restored here.
Especially in a country that has already 'extradited' people to be tortured for the US, and a country that continues to kill people without trial or conviction.
I don't think you gave your opinion on what ought to be done about the Iraqi women and children who were raped and sodomized and tortured by the US, but that this country has decided do not deserve justice. I'd be interested to get some support to pressure this government to start prosecuting the war criminals and to reverse the policy of 'moving on' from those crimes.
Thanks for kicking the thread.
You're ignoring my point though. Why would he have to be extradited to Sweden to be extradited to the US, if the UK would also have to agree to that extradition to the US? Why wouldn't they just skip that step and pull him out of the UK? I don't see any reason for that. You also didn't even acknowledge that there is a large difference between extradition and rendition/extrajudicial repatriation and your attempt to use the case of Agiza an al-Zery makes me think you don't know all the details of that story either.
As comically evil as the US is, they're not stupid. They either don't give a shit about him because if they did they would've done whatever with him long ago, or they're smart enough (the US is very crafty and intelligent) to wait until no one gives a shit about Assange and take care of him them. The amount of public unrest that would come from Assange going missing now is far from worth it and if you think the United States is dumb enough to let that happen you need to read more about it's history in international affairs.
I feel like your refusing to acknowledge international law and other solid facts and assume things with no solid evidence other than gut feeling makes you not informed about the whole story but caving into emotion over evidence.
I like Assange, Manning and Wikileaks as much as the next guy but there's not legitimate excuse for him not to stand trial for rape charges here.
I see you added something unrelated to this about the US military and the awful things it has done/continues to do. I feel that there is almost no redeeming qualities to the United States and they are the most problematic country in the world right now and that not only should war criminals by tried to a higher standard and our wars should be ended, but our military disbanded and made into a limited, non-police military force comparable to Iceland's. I think you get the wrong impression of me. I think that most governments are evil as shit but none of this as a legitimate excuse for ASsange to avoid rape charges.
one more edit, I know you said the forum has made up it's mind on Assange but it is always healthy to have a variety of opinions, as long as they're informed. I was a lurker for a long time until today when I saw this thread and felt I wanted to add my input. I've read a lot into this and am a big junkie of international affairs so I feel I have a good grasp on this and wanted to share. While it may not convince you or anyone, hopefully it gives someone who reads this forum something to think about. The fact that no one seem to know the difference between extradition and rendition makes it worth it alone, that way people can know the difference in the future. I did not ever see that cable from 2006 with Sweden interfering with the CIA renditions, and was grateful to read that. It's all part of the learning experience 
Stratfor have always been taken seriously, up to now! The moving of the goalposts when it comes to Wikileaks, has become practically an Olympic Sport. 
They tortured Manning hoping to get him to implicate Assange. The torture finally ended when worldwide condemnation and statements from P.J. Crowley among others, the UN Rappateur eg, made it clear that the world would not accept testimony from someone who was tortured, not to mention, as P.J. Crowley said, it was 'counter productive' and yet another huge embarrassment to the US.
When there is no crime, no evidence of a crime, it does take time to try to try to fabricate one, to manipulate the law and witnesses. Especially when you are dealing with a multi-award winning Journalist.
I wonder what our torture criminals, Yoo eg, have been doing these days?
I think he's doing just fine in the Embassy. According to his Australian attorney he's quite comfortable and relaxed there.
I don't know why, but you sound familiar. Or I should say, your arguments, most of them merely opinions, sound familiar.
Have you studied the actual evidence in this case? Your continued claims that there are charges against Assange, make me think you have not.
In case you haven't noticed yet, we have had endless conversations on this theme with very little prospect to convince anyone to see things differently.
I'm sitting this one out for now but...welcome!
