Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 07:58 PM Aug 2012

So how are they going to get Julian Assange out of England?

Any speculations? I thought what if they lift him out in a helicopter and take him to France so he can board an airplane for Ecuador? Would the English dare shoot it out of the air? What if he makes it to Ecuador, will the USA send in a team of SEALS to kidnap him? So many possibilities and if he does escape out of America's clutches, it would make a helluva story.


7 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
Smuggle him out with the laundry.
0 (0%)
Dress him like a woman and drive him to the airport.
1 (14%)
Lift him out with a helicopter.
0 (0%)
Roll him up in a rug put him in a truck container and drive him to France.
0 (0%)
Other? Explain
6 (86%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll
111 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
So how are they going to get Julian Assange out of England? (Original Post) Cleita Aug 2012 OP
Inside a person-sized lasagna. nt limpyhobbler Aug 2012 #1
a diplomatic pouch man-purse? nt flamingdem Aug 2012 #6
I changed the lasagna to make it gender neutral. limpyhobbler Aug 2012 #10
ut oh am i going to get in trouble? flamingdem Aug 2012 #12
You have to call it a "carry-all" limpyhobbler Aug 2012 #20
ha ha ha - you made me look! flamingdem Aug 2012 #29
Other ,they're all connected to the orpupilofnature57 Aug 2012 #2
The 'doomsday threat' is a bluff. randome Aug 2012 #9
Maybe he's got something on CORREA...which motivated the enthusiasm to grant asylum? MADem Aug 2012 #42
Hero no , Smart yes and his woes are a result of orpupilofnature57 Aug 2012 #61
What a movie script! treestar Aug 2012 #3
I thought so too, depending on how it plays out. n/t Cleita Aug 2012 #4
He might just be stuck in the Embassy until he decides to take his chances with Sweden. MADem Aug 2012 #5
Oh but he is in America's clutches. Cleita Aug 2012 #7
Why should Sweden, where he is accused of a crime, play lets make a deal with a purported rapist? MADem Aug 2012 #43
Actually, he's only wanted in Sweden for questioning, not arrest. This Cleita Aug 2012 #46
An international arrest warrant WAS issued, and they want a DNA sample according to some accounts. MADem Aug 2012 #55
Your links are out of date. Here's the latest. Cleita Aug 2012 #67
You aren't understanding--the Swedes cannot CHARGE him until they interview him IN Sweden. MADem Aug 2012 #68
And this is why it's all so suspect. If all they really wanted to do is interview him Cleita Aug 2012 #70
Again, you are just not understanding--"skype" is not "physically present in Sweden" and this is an MADem Aug 2012 #79
YOU don't understand. When they say one thing but really mean another, it doesn't pass the Cleita Aug 2012 #82
I do understand, though. I've lived under many legal systems -- very diverse ones, too--so I tend MADem Aug 2012 #96
If he is caught in this web of intrigue and is extradited, or kidnapped, whatever happens, Cleita Aug 2012 #98
Call me on what? For NOTICING a few things? MADem Aug 2012 #111
Found a link for you on The Young Turks Cleita Aug 2012 #49
Damn that nefarious Obama! Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2012 #81
Obama is doing his job to stop those embarrassing secrets from Cleita Aug 2012 #83
Obama is covering up war crimes? Obama is going to send Assange to Gitmo? Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2012 #89
I don't think Obama has anything to do with it. Cleita Aug 2012 #90
MISSION IMPOSSIBLE: WIKIPROTOCOL derby378 Aug 2012 #8
Fulton Skyhook. -..__... Aug 2012 #11
That's very clever but wouldn't it require the US military to do that? Cleita Aug 2012 #13
Batman might still have one lying around (n/t) derby378 Aug 2012 #15
Ecuador has C-130's. -..__... Aug 2012 #35
Very large diplomatic pouch exboyfil Aug 2012 #14
seconded n/t LadyHawkAZ Aug 2012 #17
Interesting. Where there is a will, it seems there is a way.n/t Cleita Aug 2012 #22
How about a diplomatic pooch? flamingdem Aug 2012 #36
Well he could ... Historic NY Aug 2012 #16
He's already out slutticus Aug 2012 #18
A source would help. Cleita Aug 2012 #21
That doesn't make any sense... SidDithers Aug 2012 #26
Ahhh, tell us all about it, now.... nt MADem Aug 2012 #44
Wiki-scape? chowder66 Aug 2012 #19
Wi-scape elehhhhna Aug 2012 #28
; ) chowder66 Aug 2012 #38
Well it IS and island.... so there are boats underpants Aug 2012 #23
Dressed like a gal... greytdemocrat Aug 2012 #24
Other. They're not... SidDithers Aug 2012 #25
The British Gov't has nothing to gain by keeping him there. They'll let him go leveymg Aug 2012 #27
True, which makes it even more mystifying why they would hurt Cleita Aug 2012 #30
Somebody in the Foreign Office or MI6 has a bugger up their butt about him. Same in DC. leveymg Aug 2012 #33
Nah. The Swedes are pizzed-off. Assange had toyed with them in Sep and Oct 2010, as they tried struggle4progress Aug 2012 #40
I really think this is thin skins in Foggy Bottom than anything that happened in Sweden. leveymg Aug 2012 #54
Why would the Swedes give a rat's ass about the US State Department cables? struggle4progress Aug 2012 #56
For one thing, they're pissed that Wikileaks revealed their relationship with US intelligence. leveymg Aug 2012 #62
IIRC Karl Rove has also advised the Swedish PM in the past. CJCRANE Aug 2012 #64
IIRC the warrant issued before cable publication began struggle4progress Aug 2012 #69
That statement is incredibly misleading and FOS. Wikileaks has been releasing materials of interest leveymg Aug 2012 #73
Get 5000 or more supporters to dress in Guy Fawkes masks, storm the embassy hlthe2b Aug 2012 #31
That's a pretty good scenario and you Cleita Aug 2012 #32
No, no! Julian Assange masks! leveymg Aug 2012 #34
The police's first goal would be to retain positive control over the points of egress. MADem Aug 2012 #48
take a lot of police to control 5000 unexpected protesters descending on the embassy... hlthe2b Aug 2012 #51
They wouldn't be "unexpected." Are you at all familiar with that area, or how Metropolitan Police MADem Aug 2012 #60
unless i'm wrong Ecuadorian law would prevent him from becoming a citizen Bodhi BloodWave Aug 2012 #63
I think the problem might be that even if the Ecuadorans gave him diplomatic status, his MADem Aug 2012 #71
tie him on top of Mitt's car. n/t progressivebydesign Aug 2012 #37
Other: He gets bored, or the spotlight wanes, and he turns himself back in to England. Robb Aug 2012 #39
some "Misanthropes" will weasel a way to snatch him fascisthunter Aug 2012 #41
Magic. CabCurious Aug 2012 #45
Or a dimensional shift? Cleita Aug 2012 #47
I'll take in the boot of a Mini for $100, Alex. HooptieWagon Aug 2012 #50
. UnrepentantLiberal Aug 2012 #52
"Oh, if I had the wings of an angel" Cleita Aug 2012 #53
He'll stay in the embassy for 800 years, like that knight in the Indiana Jones movie n/t RZM Aug 2012 #57
That knight had the Holy Grail to keep him alive. Cleita Aug 2012 #58
No, just a crown of thorns RZM Aug 2012 #59
The asylum granted is only within the embassy, not Ecuador TorchTheWitch Aug 2012 #65
Maybe they are giving a rat's ass now after Britain threatened Cleita Aug 2012 #66
They are, like it or not, a colony in some regards--their "official currency" is the US DOLLAR. MADem Aug 2012 #72
Yeah, yeah. Cleita Aug 2012 #74
No, no--not indexed. The actual DOLLAR. MADem Aug 2012 #84
We still don't have a government there. Cleita Aug 2012 #86
We don't WANT a government there--at least not right now. MADem Aug 2012 #91
So stop saying they are a colony of ours or Great Britain. n/t Cleita Aug 2012 #94
They are tied to us by the dollar, so they are--even if THEY don't like it--a colony of sorts. MADem Aug 2012 #97
Whatever! Cleita Aug 2012 #99
No need to be petty and uncivil. It is possible to disagree without name calling and MADem Aug 2012 #100
I think the only realistic option is for the Equadorian gov't & consul to negotiate safe passage. backscatter712 Aug 2012 #75
All it will do is buy him time. Yes, I believe he will be a hunted man Cleita Aug 2012 #77
Safe passage will not be granted. Ecuador has signed on to be Assange's jailer. MADem Aug 2012 #87
Frankly, Quito will only be a stopover. Cleita Aug 2012 #92
Which country would you predict he jump to? MADem Aug 2012 #103
It would have to be one without an extradition treaty with the USA and that has the Cleita Aug 2012 #104
Well, I've named them all. MADem Aug 2012 #105
Apparently some countries who do have treaties with us often choose to ignore them, Cleita Aug 2012 #106
Not often. Occasionally, sure--Ira Einhorn comes to mind, but we got him eventually. MADem Aug 2012 #107
I wonder if Iceland would let Assange stay there or go through there? backscatter712 Aug 2012 #109
Hide him with Mitts taxes 2pooped2pop Aug 2012 #76
The Tube of course n/t YankeyMCC Aug 2012 #78
Do something similar to the Flying Elvises. KansDem Aug 2012 #80
That was sort of suggested up thread using Guy Fawke masks. n/t Cleita Aug 2012 #93
Other ikri Aug 2012 #85
Interesting. I wonder if they know this. n/t Cleita Aug 2012 #88
Why would UK do that? ECUADOR would need to do that--not UK. MADem Aug 2012 #95
tardis ? limpyhobbler Aug 2012 #101
But Dr. Who is probably on the side of the Brits so he wouldn't Cleita Aug 2012 #102
TARDIS, of course librechik Aug 2012 #108
Well, he IS in England, after all. Tommy_Carcetti Aug 2012 #110
 

randome

(34,845 posts)
9. The 'doomsday threat' is a bluff.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 08:15 PM
Aug 2012

If Assange is such a hero, he should publish what he has, not try to blackmail the world.

He may have done some good with Wikileaks but he is a flawed hero.

Most are.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
42. Maybe he's got something on CORREA...which motivated the enthusiasm to grant asylum?
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 09:16 PM
Aug 2012

It's a far-fetched supposition, but one never knows....

 

orpupilofnature57

(15,472 posts)
61. Hero no , Smart yes and his woes are a result of
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 06:12 AM
Aug 2012

TELLING THE TRUTH! . how "flawed" is an unjust war?

MADem

(135,425 posts)
5. He might just be stuck in the Embassy until he decides to take his chances with Sweden.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 08:11 PM
Aug 2012

Correa won't be in charge of Ecuador forever. Leaders change, asylum can be revoked. Even if Assange did make it onto an airplane and into international airspace to Quito. All he'd become is a bargaining chip for the Next Guy.

In sum, all Assange is, is "safe for now."

FWIW, he's not IN "America's clutches." He's trapped on the first floor of the Ecuadoran Embassy, in Great Britain, in central London, across the lane from Harrod's, and he can't leave without a real risk of being arrested.

I rather doubt a helicopter could get permission to fly over the rooftops and swoop low over Harrod's in Knightsbridge to pluck Mister Assange off the roof. I'm betting the Brits would shoot the thing out of the sky, assuming it to be on a terror mission,, if it tried to do anything of the sort without permissions.

I suppose Correa could give him citizenship and make him an Ecuadoran diplomat, but that would be a bit of a jaunt, even for him.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
7. Oh but he is in America's clutches.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 08:15 PM
Aug 2012

Cenk Uygur explained it very well in his show today. Assange said he would go to Sweden and face the charges as long as Sweden agrees not to extradite him to the USA. Sweden can't make that promise. It's pretty obvious that they will extradite him. Actually, Cenk did a time line and the whole things stinks of American Imperialism in a big way.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
43. Why should Sweden, where he is accused of a crime, play lets make a deal with a purported rapist?
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 09:21 PM
Aug 2012

He keeps whining that he could be "put to death" in America, but Sweden will not extradite if that's on the table. That's part of their and European law.

He's playing Sweden, he's playing you, he's playing the world.

He isn't a US citizen--they can sweat the hell out of him, find piddly little charges to get him on, but they would have a helluva time hanging the guy. Now, if Bradley Manning flipped on him and claimed it was all HIS idea, he could do some serious time--and that's what he's afraid of, I think.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
46. Actually, he's only wanted in Sweden for questioning, not arrest. This
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 09:25 PM
Aug 2012

is where it all falls apart because he could be interviewed over Skype and wouldn't have to go to Sweden at all. But the Americans want him to go to Sweden so they can extradite him and the Swedes are going along with it. They had previously dismissed the case as having no merit and then after Assange released a bunch of new documents all of a sudden the case was reinstated. I mean really try to find that clip from Cenk's Young Turks show. He really lays the bull shit out very clearly.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
55. An international arrest warrant WAS issued, and they want a DNA sample according to some accounts.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 09:53 PM
Aug 2012

Sweden says they will guarantee his rights. They also say that the charges that were initiated and then dropped were, in fact, renewed.

http://www.thelocal.se/37112/20111102/

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505245_162-57494326/julian-assanges-long-fight-against-extradition/

http://www.thelocal.se/42658/20120816/

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/02/wikileaks-sweden/

I am by no means an expert on Swedish law, but I do know that, in UK, when you are "assisting the police with their enquiries" you aren't actually assisting the police, you're a suspicious character. When they issue an ARREST warrant, I assume they regard him suspiciously.

But like I say, I don't really know a thing about Swedish law!

The irony of all this is that Assange went to Sweden in the first place because he wanted to move his Wiki operation there. He should have --forgive the expression--boned up on Swedish laws with regard to sexual relations. They apparently don't take force/coercion/rape cases lightly.

I guess "Nej" means "Nej" over that way, as it should everywhere.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
67. Your links are out of date. Here's the latest.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 11:51 AM
Aug 2012
A SWEDISH minister has called besieged WikiLeaks' founder Julian Assange a "coward", a "pitiful wretch" and a "scumbag".

Swedish media reports the Minister of Social Affairs Goran Hagglund has fired off a furious Twitter message:

"Sick. A coward who does not dare to have his case tried by the court. If the accusations against him are true, he is a scumbag."

There are no charges against Assange. Sweden insists he is wanted only for questioning in relation to sexual assault allegations.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/ecuador-to-announce-assange-asylum-britain-threat-to-raid-embassy/story-fnd134gw-1226451503293

MADem

(135,425 posts)
68. You aren't understanding--the Swedes cannot CHARGE him until they interview him IN Sweden.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 01:15 PM
Aug 2012
It is their law. They HAVE issued an international arrest warrant to compel him to return to Sweden to be charged.

IF a prosecutor "charges" before interviewing, he or she is shirking their duty and behaving unprofessionally. It's grounds for misconduct charges.

The problem people seem to be having here is that they are superimposing US/UK law on Swedish law. It's not the same. The rules of evidence are different, and the order in which things happen differs.

Assange has not yet been formally charged with any offence;[35] the prosecutor said that, in accordance with the Swedish legal system, formal charges will be laid only after extradition and a second round of questioning. The High Court found that the Swedish process has reached the stage of criminal proceedings, which would be equivalent to having been charged under English process.[36]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_Swedish_Prosecution_Authority

As far as the Swedes are concerned, Assange has been asked by the authorities to account for himself and he has refused. Again, the last sentence of that quote is germane:

The High Court found that the Swedish process has reached the stage of criminal proceedings, which would be equivalent to having been charged under English process.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
70. And this is why it's all so suspect. If all they really wanted to do is interview him
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 01:41 PM
Aug 2012

there is Skype. He has said he will face rape charges as long as they guarantee he will not be extradited to the US. He's not running away from facing the rape charges just extradition. He will be charged with treason in the USA although I don't know how our justice system can justify that since he's not an American. He knows he will be in Gitmo or Quantico and tortured. Cherry picking the facts does not make your case.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
79. Again, you are just not understanding--"skype" is not "physically present in Sweden" and this is an
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:42 PM
Aug 2012

element of THEIR law, like it or not. It's like saying "Well, I don't like the idea of being arraigned for the crime I committed in the USA, I'm going to skip that appearance in court and I demand that you understand my point of view. What do you mean you don't see things my way? It's MY perspective, after all--US law doesn't matter, because it's all about MEEEE."

We don't do things the same way as Sweden, but we don't do things the same way as Jordan, Italy and a host of other countries. He is accused (the equivalent of 'charged' in English law, as noted above) in Sweden, and it is in accordance with Swedish law that he has to get correct. He doesn't get to play Let's Make a Deal.

Further, he has no right to DEMAND anything--he's the frigging accused. That said, the Swedes have made a number of statements that suggest his dramatic fears are unfounded. Some people choose not to believe them, and there's nothing anyone can say to convince them otherwise.

What I think is funny as hell is that while Assange's supporters are crowing and cheering about "victory," what is actually happening here is a public imprisonment of the guy in a circumstance that makes it difficult if not impossible for him to do ANYTHING. He's OUT OF CIRCULATION, in essence. He won't be running his Wiki-empire from the front room on the first floor of the Ecuadoran Embassy, you can count on that--if he even tries it, the Brits have a law on their side that was a consequence of the Libyan thing back in the eighties, and they WILL exercise their perogative (that, I suspect, is what that "warning" to Ecuador was really all about--only they were too thick to see it coming). He's STUCK.

And he's safe only so long as Correa rules, and not a day longer, which is another thing he'll have to worry about, eventually. All he's doing is delaying his situation, unless the Ecuadorans can find a way to smuggle him out of the country (and that might be a difficult trick). Even if he is smuggled away, he'll be transported to delightful Quito, a crime-ridden hellhole where you can't even get into a taxi on the street without being robbed, raped and beaten, if not murdered. They've got such a lovely organization going that they use the American dollar as their OFFICIAL currency. Bribery and corruption are rife, and freedom of the press is just not happening, either. It's not a fun place to be stuck, forever and ever and ever, even as it might be an interesting place to visit with interesting culture and nice people and some historical/tourist sites of interest. In essence, he'd exchange one cage (a room with a view of Muhamad al Fayed's little shop) for another (the crime-soaked streets of Quito).

If only he'd kept his dirty business in his trousers when he went to Sweden, instead of behaving like a perverse and entitled pig at a minimum, and a rapist at worst case, he would be running his Wiki empire OUT OF SWEDEN--that's why he went there in the first place, because he PREFERRED their laws about whistleblowing over all others--he actually shopped around to find the best country for this sort of thing. But he cannot go back there now because he knows his DNA matches the sample they have, and he could do up to four years in Swedish prison--not because he's afraid of the Americans.

It does make for a good tale, though--rife with drama and portent! The bottom line here, though, that most are not seeing, is this--the Ecuadorans have been gamed into imprisoning Assange, paying for his food and shelter, having to deal with his wants and needs, while purporting to offer him protection from imprisonment. His cage is slightly more gilded than the average cell, and has a lovely view of Harrod's just across the road, but he's in a cell of sorts, make no mistake.

He'd better hope he doesn't ever need surgery--I don't know if the Embassy will want a doctor coming in to cut on the guy on the Embassy's dining room table or the prep table in the kitchen!

I suppose he might as well settle in, and work on perfecting his Spanish...! Gotta occupy oneself one way or another...

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
82. YOU don't understand. When they say one thing but really mean another, it doesn't pass the
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:47 PM
Aug 2012

BS meter test. He does get to play, "let's make a deal" because the ball is in his court right now. He knows the US wants him and the fact that Karl Rove has his dirty fingers in this makes it all the more suspect. If I were a female Julian Assange and I knew these things, I too would prefer Quito to Gitmo.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
96. I do understand, though. I've lived under many legal systems -- very diverse ones, too--so I tend
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 03:27 PM
Aug 2012

to not make 'assumptions' about how 'the law' is supposed to work. The law in Iran is very different from the law in Italy, and the law in Sweden is very different from the law in UK or USA.

This isn't a "BS meter test" thing. This is a basic difference in laws and procedures of sovereign nations.

In USA, if you kill someone with your car, you get charged with a crime and you go to court and stand before a judge and/or jury. They rule on your guilt or innocence and you either go to jail or walk free. In Saudi Arabia, if you kill someone with your car, you can go to the family of the person you killed, negotiate a blood payment based on the "value" of the life you took, and walk free with no problem. No harm, no foul, no record.

You cannot, though, superimpose Saudi law on the American system of jurisprudence. Nor can we superimpose USA or UK law on the Swedish system. You are trying to do that, and you are discounting Sweden's national integrity and accusing them without any evidence of nefarious conduct, simply for wanting to enforce their system of jurisprudence.

Rove has nothing to do with this. That's just silliness. No one is going to Gitmo. That's utter silliness, too.

Why send someone to Gitmo, really, when they're safe and secure and prevented from doing anything of any consequence right across the lane from Harrod's?

Doesn't make a lick of sense. Ecuador has done a fine job, accidentally or deliberately, of playing jailer--temporary or long term--on behalf of the government of Sweden.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
98. If he is caught in this web of intrigue and is extradited, or kidnapped, whatever happens,
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 03:31 PM
Aug 2012

I will call you on this. You are so wrong in ignoring the information as it is revealed. I'm not saying all the facts are correct because evolving stories are full of errors, but the stuff that can be verified is pretty stunning and I don't believe that you really want to ignore them.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
111. Call me on what? For NOTICING a few things?
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 06:47 PM
Aug 2012

I ignore nothing--in fact, I spend a lot of time looking ALL around--not just at the obvious stuff that is waved in front of our faces, spoon fed by people who call themselves reporters.

Look at the big picture for a second. Just a quick second. Put your ideology aside and be practical.

Who benefits from Assange being stuck in the Embassy?

Ecuador does. Why? Correa wants to be the New Heir in the Square when Hugo Chavez dies. He's needs a major "coup" to do that. Tweaking the nose of UK (or appearing to) works well in that regard.

USA does. They're sick of this guy publishing their international diplomatic cables like they're National Enquirer gossip. That goes double for the countries and players named in those documents. No one likes their trashy little off-the-record remarks published for all to see. So long as he's in the Embassy, Assange isn't out there collecting more tattle-tales to publish. If he tries to run his franchise from the Embassy, the Brits will break down the door. The guy has been, in effect, MUZZLED.

Sweden does. They think he's a rapist at worst, a molester at minimum, who needs to be sentenced in Sweden and the max sentence is four years. If he sits in that Embassy for four years, hey, it's all good and they didn't have to pay to feed him, guard him, or give him dental check ups and annual physicals. It gives them an opportunity to demonstrate that they are serious about the crimes of rape and assault, which haven't always been handled, shall we say, "well" by prosecutors in that nation. The government gets a thumbs-up from Swedish women and equality-minded men who want these sort of crimes dealt with seriously.

UK does--though they, like the Ecuadorans, have to do a little work for their benefit. They are demonstrating that, even though they don't want to join the Euro Gang, that they are good neighbors to their European partners and they'll honor those international arrest warrants. No shirking on their part! No one can say they blew this one off. They also make a strong point about their sovereignty, and that usually plays well domestically.

Assange does? Well...no. All he's done is bought some time, frozen the frame, put himself in limbo. He'd better hope the world doesn't move on to some Big New Drama, as the world does--a Nahn Wun Wun or a Fukushima on steroids or a Katrina or a Haiti earthquake or an Indonesian tsunami could put him off into forgotten land, and then he'd have no bargaining power at all. The night before the announcement regarding his asylum, despite great efforts across social media, they were unable to muster even two dozen protesters and several of them were drunks wandering home after time was called. A few folks showed up after the announcement, but even they didn't hang around. The place has a few signs and a few professional protesters hanging about, but there's not "critical mass." Assange will have to make an address from a balcony or open window to stir the pot, if he can...but even that will get old, eventually. People will move on.

I ask the "Cui Bono?" question--and I look at things pragmatically. Everyone's getting what they want from this outcome, at least in the short term, and for the time being, except, perhaps Assange--unless his bucket list had "Learn conversational Spanish really, really well."

It's a win-win-win, even if briefly, for a number of the players here.

So no, I am not "wrong"--I just see things differently than you do. Your differing opinion does not trouble me, I should expect that mine shouldn't trouble you, either. It's a discussion board...the idea, here, is to discuss.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
83. Obama is doing his job to stop those embarrassing secrets from
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:49 PM
Aug 2012

getting out in public. It is understandably his job. However, we need transparency and Assange is providing that.

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
89. Obama is covering up war crimes? Obama is going to send Assange to Gitmo?
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 03:00 PM
Aug 2012

Tell me with a straight face that --

1) you actually believe that and

2) I should still vote for Obama

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
90. I don't think Obama has anything to do with it.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 03:04 PM
Aug 2012

However, the wheels are in motion to extradite him. Read this that just popped up on DU.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021151229

Yes, I will vote for him, because I have two choices, don't I?

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
13. That's very clever but wouldn't it require the US military to do that?
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 08:20 PM
Aug 2012

If they did, they would fly him directly to Gitmo, I would assume.

 

-..__...

(7,776 posts)
35. Ecuador has C-130's.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 08:59 PM
Aug 2012

If they put their minds to it... they could probably cobble something together; a few 2x4's, some clothes line, mechanics coveralls, helium filled party balloons, etc.

Success is doubtful... but hey... at least they tried.

exboyfil

(17,865 posts)
14. Very large diplomatic pouch
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 08:22 PM
Aug 2012

Any restricitons on the size?

It has happened at least twice according to Wikipedia.

In 1964, a Moroccan-born Israeli double agent named Mordechai Ben Masoud Louk (also known as Josef Dahan) was drugged, bound, and placed in a diplomatic bag at the Egyptian Embassy in Rome, but was rescued by the Italians.[4] The crate that he had been placed in appeared to have been used for a similar purpose before, possibly for an Egyptian military official who had defected to Italy several years before but then disappeared without a trace before reappearing under Egyptian custody and facing trial.

In the 1984 Dikko Affair, a former Nigerian government minister, was kidnapped and placed in a shipping crate, in an attempt to transport him from the United Kingdom back to Nigeria for trial.[4] However, it was not marked as a diplomatic bag, which allowed British customs to open it.[4]

SidDithers

(44,228 posts)
26. That doesn't make any sense...
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 08:44 PM
Aug 2012

if he's already out, then there was no need for Correa to give him asylum. He could have just said "Assange is in Ecuador and won't be extradited."

Sid

SidDithers

(44,228 posts)
25. Other. They're not...
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 08:41 PM
Aug 2012

He'll languish in an Ecuadoran office until either he gets bored and leaves, or until the Ecuadorans get sick of him, and kick him out.

Sid

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
30. True, which makes it even more mystifying why they would hurt
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 08:46 PM
Aug 2012

their diplomatic relations with Ecuador and South America at large by threatening to storm the embassy and arrest him.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
33. Somebody in the Foreign Office or MI6 has a bugger up their butt about him. Same in DC.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 08:51 PM
Aug 2012

So, they'll make a big show until there is a quiet agreement reached to put him in an Embassy Car and drive him to Heathrow. Then, he's out of their hair, and -- maybe not so good for him -- largely out of sight.

Keep him in London and his media gravity just grows, and they can't do anything drastic to him.

struggle4progress

(118,339 posts)
40. Nah. The Swedes are pizzed-off. Assange had toyed with them in Sep and Oct 2010, as they tried
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 09:10 PM
Aug 2012

to set up a second interview. Finally they swore out a warrant and crossed over to the UK. Once Assange was in custody, they opposed bail while Assange fought the warrant, but bail was granted anyway, Naturally, Assange jumped bail as soon as he lost his suit

And ain't nobody enjoy hearin from no buncha pizzed-off Vikings

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
54. I really think this is thin skins in Foggy Bottom than anything that happened in Sweden.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 09:50 PM
Aug 2012

It was the State Dept. cables that were released, after all. Embarrassing to be shown to have said one thing and to have written another on so many occasions in so many countries.

struggle4progress

(118,339 posts)
56. Why would the Swedes give a rat's ass about the US State Department cables?
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 10:00 PM
Aug 2012

Sweden stayed out of both world wars and remained unaligned during the cold war

It was a major destination for US youth dodging the Vietnam draft

Your theory is purely hallucinatory

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
62. For one thing, they're pissed that Wikileaks revealed their relationship with US intelligence.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 07:11 AM
Aug 2012

You ignore the relationship between the Swedish prosecutor with the US and cooperation in rendition.

Sweden isn't the land of asylum for Yosarian and draft dodgers from Vietnam anymore. It, too, has it's share of Rovian right-wingers in law enforcement and intelligence. Are you completely ignorant, or, are you just pretending to be? See,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-kreig/rove-suspected-in-swedish_b_798737.html

Hallucinatory, my ass.

CJCRANE

(18,184 posts)
64. IIRC Karl Rove has also advised the Swedish PM in the past.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 07:48 AM
Aug 2012

He has some kind of connection to a Swedish RW party. I know a Swedish person whose family met him in Sweden and who thinks he's a hero.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
73. That statement is incredibly misleading and FOS. Wikileaks has been releasing materials of interest
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:21 PM
Aug 2012

to the US Gov't since Assange founded it in 2006.

WikiLeaks was founded in 2006.[2][78] That year, Assange wrote two essays setting out the philosophy behind WikiLeaks: "To radically shift regime behaviour we must think clearly and boldly for if we have learned anything, it is that regimes do not want to be changed. We must think beyond those who have gone before us and discover technological changes that embolden us with ways to act in which our forebears could not."[79][80][81] In his blog he wrote, "the more secretive or unjust an organization is, the more leaks induce fear and paranoia in its leadership and planning coterie.... Since unjust systems, by their nature, induce opponents, and in many places barely have the upper hand, mass leaking leaves them exquisitely vulnerable to those who seek to replace them with more open forms of governance."[79][82]
Assange is the most prominent media spokesman on WikiLeaks' behalf. In June 2010, he was listed alongside several others as a member of the WikiLeaks advisory board.
Previous Wikileaks releases of potential interest to US Gov’t:

2006–08
WikiLeaks posted its first document in December 2006, a decision to assassinate government officials signed by Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys."[22] In November 2007, a March 2003 copy of Standard Operating Procedures for Camp Delta detailing the protocol of the U.S. Army at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp was released.[105] The document revealed that some prisoners were off-limits to the International Committee of the Red Cross, something that the U.S. military had in the past repeatedly denied.[106]
In September 2008, during the 2008 United States presidential election campaigns, the contents of a Yahoo account belonging to Sarah Palin (the running mate of Republican presidential nominee John McCain) were posted on WikiLeaks after being hacked into by members of Anonymous.[111]
2009
In July, it released a report relating to a serious nuclear accident that had occurred at the Iranian Natanz nuclear facility in 2009.[119] Later media reports have suggested that the accident was related to the Stuxnet computer worm.[120][121] In September, internal documents from Kaupthing Bank were leaked, from shortly before the collapse of Iceland's banking sector, which led to the 2008–2012 Icelandic financial crisis. The document shows that suspiciously large sums of money were loaned to various owners of the bank, and large debts written off.[122] In October, Joint Services Protocol 440, a British document advising the security services on how to avoid documents being leaked was published by WikiLeaks.[123] It also released 570,000 intercepts of pager messages sent on the day of the 11 September attacks
2010
In mid-February 2010, WikiLeaks received a diplomatic cable from the US Embassy in Reykjavik relating to the Icesave scandal, which they published on 18 February.[132] The cable, known as Reykjavik 13 was the first of the classified documents WikiLeaks published among those allegedly provided to them by US Army Private Bradley Manning. In March 2010, WikiLeaks released a secret 32-page U.S. Department of Defense Counterintelligence Analysis Report written in March 2008 discussing the leaking of material by WikiLeaks and how it could be deterred.[133][134][135] In April, a classified video of the 12 July 2007 Baghdad airstrike was released, showing two Reuters employees being fired at, after the pilots mistakenly thought the men were carrying weapons, which were in fact cameras.[136] In the week following the release, "wikileaks" was the search term with the most significant growth worldwide in the last seven days as measured by Google Insights.[137] In June 2010, Manning was arrested after alleged chat logs were turned in to the authorities by former hacker Adrian Lamo, in whom he had confided. Manning reportedly told Lamo he had leaked the "Collateral Murder" video, in addition to a video of the Granai airstrike and around 260,000 diplomatic cables, to WikiLeaks.[138] In July, WikiLeaks released 92,000 documents related to the war in Afghanistan between 2004 and the end of 2009 to The Guardian, The New York Times and Der Spiegel. The documents detail individual incidents including friendly fire and civilian casualties.[139] At the end of July, a 1.4 GB "insurance file" was added to the Afghan War Diary page, whose decryption details would be released if WikiLeaks or Assange were harmed.[82] About 15,000 of the 92,000 documents have not yet been released on WikiLeaks, as the group is currently reviewing the documents to remove some of the sources of the information. WikiLeaks asked the Pentagon and human-rights groups to help remove names from the documents to reduce the potential harm caused by their release, but did not receive assistance.[140] Following the Love Parade stampede in Duisburg, Germany, on 24 July 2010, a local resident published internal documents of the city administration regarding the planning of Love Parade. The city government reacted by securing a court order on 16 August forcing the removal of the documents from the site on which it was hosted.[141] On 20 August 2010, WikiLeaks released a publication entitled Loveparade 2010 Duisburg planning documents, 2007–2010, which comprised 43 internal documents regarding the Love Parade 2010.[142][143] Following on from the leak of information from the Afghan War, in October 2010, around 400,000 documents relating to the Iraq War were released. The BBC quoted The Pentagon referring to the Iraq War Logs as "the largest leak of classified documents in its history." Media coverage of the leaked documents focused on claims that the U.S. government had ignored reports of torture by the Iraqi authorities during the period after the 2003 war.[144]
Diplomatic cables release
Main articles: United States diplomatic cables leak, contents, and reactions
On 28 November 2010, WikiLeaks and five major newspapers from Spain (El País), France (Le Monde), Germany (Der Spiegel), the United Kingdom (The Guardian), and the United States (The New York Times) started to simultaneously publish the first 220 of 251,287 leaked confidential—but not top-secret—diplomatic cables from 274 US embassies around the world, dated from 28 December 1966 to 28 February 2010.[145][146] WikiLeaks plans to release the entirety of the cables in phases over several months.[146]
The contents of the diplomatic cables include numerous unguarded comments and revelations regarding: critiques and praises about the host countries of various US embassies; political manoeuvring regarding climate change; discussion and resolutions towards ending ongoing tension in the Middle East; efforts and resistance towards nuclear disarmament; actions in the War on Terror; assessments of other threats around the world; dealings between various countries; US intelligence and counterintelligence efforts; and other diplomatic actions. Reactions to the United States diplomatic cables leak include stark criticism, anticipation, commendation, and quiescence. Consequent reactions to the US government include ridicule, sympathy, bewilderment and dismay. On 14 December 2010 the United States Department of Justice issued a subpoena directing Twitter to provide information for accounts registered to or associated with WikiLeaks.[147] Twitter decided to notify its users.[148] The overthrow of the presidency in Tunisia has been attributed in part to reaction against the corruption revealed by leaked cables.[149][150][151]

hlthe2b

(102,360 posts)
31. Get 5000 or more supporters to dress in Guy Fawkes masks, storm the embassy
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 08:50 PM
Aug 2012

and let about three dozen or more leave in official vehicles concurrently. Let the one with Assange stop in a field somewhere where a helicopter arranges to meet him and fly him to France where he boards a plane to other intermediate countries as necessary and eventually on to Ecuador.


If it works, I get the movie screenplay royalties.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
48. The police's first goal would be to retain positive control over the points of egress.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 09:27 PM
Aug 2012

There would be no mingling, and where are you going to fit "three dozen official vehicles" on that small lane?

It is a very dense area--right across from Harrod's.

hlthe2b

(102,360 posts)
51. take a lot of police to control 5000 unexpected protesters descending on the embassy...
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 09:37 PM
Aug 2012

Not something they would come prepared for. In that amount of confusion, they would be very unlikely to retain complete control over egress.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
60. They wouldn't be "unexpected." Are you at all familiar with that area, or how Metropolitan Police
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 10:26 PM
Aug 2012

keep tabs on what's happening throughout the city? They have their eye on every little sparrow. You can't go a half block without being photographed live and in color/facial identification/from several angles. They'd see people coming before they had an opportunity to "mass" in any way.

They'd simply stop the tube (or keep going well past Knightsbridge) and the buses ("We're so sorry, there's interference on the route, your patience is appreciated&quot and no one would have any way of getting there. They'd block off the streets so no one could get close if a crowd started to form and move towards the area.

It's a "movie plot" plan, but that's all it is. Before the crowds got large at all, they'd be 'on' it and preventing anyone from getting anywhere near the place. They have some state of the art barricades, too--way better than the stuff the USA has.

Hell, last night there were a dozen to fifteen people, including a few drunks, in front of the Embassy at three in the morning, and the police had three vans with a dozen police in each of them (the vans, of course, would do double-duty as paddy wagons) "just in case."

Those guys know how to do crowd control.

In any event, I'm sure Mister Assange is dancing for joy at his (perhaps temporary) reprieve:

&feature=player_embedded


Maybe Correa will make him a citizen and a diplomat--he could leave if this were the case, but Correa would do irreparable damage to his own reputation, diplomatically speaking, if he did do that. Already he's feeling some blowback, the only love he's getting is from the usual crowd that dislikes America's interventions in South America.

I hope he likes Ecuador should that be the case, though, because it's unlikely he'd leave for a long, long time. At least so long as Correa is in power...!

Bodhi BloodWave

(2,346 posts)
63. unless i'm wrong Ecuadorian law would prevent him from becoming a citizen
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 07:41 AM
Aug 2012

i could be off, but i seem to recall reading something akin to that in a different thread a few days ago.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
71. I think the problem might be that even if the Ecuadorans gave him diplomatic status, his
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:04 PM
Aug 2012

"credentials" still have to be accepted by the UK government in order for him to receive diplomatic immunity. Without the "OK" of the host government, there's no point in giving him a title.

Also, in order for him to receive Ecuadoran citizenship (and who would want that, really--it's a crime-ridden country with MAJOR problems) he would have to renounce his Aussie citizenship publicly. I wouldn't recommend he do that.

Robb

(39,665 posts)
39. Other: He gets bored, or the spotlight wanes, and he turns himself back in to England.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 09:08 PM
Aug 2012

Suddenly there are new charges around skipping bail. Some civil suits perhaps. So more trials. More drama. Meanwhile, the US will still stubbornly refuse to indict him -- at this point I expect they'd just get a kick out of doing nothing, and allowing him to look ever more the loon.

Eventually he'll go to Sweden. Beat the rape charges. Never be charged with anything by the US. And declare victory.

2015 or so, he'll kill a hooker and wind up in a Spanish jail, where he'll learn to play the sitar, eventually releasing his solo album in 2018 -- posthumously, having died from an undiagnosed bowel obstruction while awaiting a parole board hearing.

Any other questions?

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
58. That knight had the Holy Grail to keep him alive.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 10:17 PM
Aug 2012

Does Assange have that? Inquiring minds want to know.

TorchTheWitch

(11,065 posts)
65. The asylum granted is only within the embassy, not Ecuador
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 08:03 AM
Aug 2012

That's the first problem. Ecuador's embassy is only a portion of the building (Columbia also has it's embassy in the same building), so he can't go out by helicopter (there is nowhere to land one at or on the embassy anyway).

He's stuck. The moment he leaves that portion of the building which is the embassy of Ecuador the Brits will nab him. Essentially he's made his own prison there.

Personally, I don't think Ecuador gives a rat's ass about Assange and is only doing this to gain leverage for something they want from Britain for which the negotiations will be about.


Cleita

(75,480 posts)
66. Maybe they are giving a rat's ass now after Britain threatened
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 11:33 AM
Aug 2012

their diplomatic immunity. Hatred of all things gringo, and yes Brits are considered gringo, runs deep throughout South America and this kind of insult won't be forgotten. The Ecuadorians tartly commented that they are not a British colony to be treated that way. They will dig their heels in because of the insult. As a South American myself, I know how the feelings about these interactions with British and Americans, two countries that have exploited much of South America, run.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
72. They are, like it or not, a colony in some regards--their "official currency" is the US DOLLAR.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:12 PM
Aug 2012

Ecuador has serious problems, not the least with major, violent crime and deep-reaching corruption in their government. And that Presidente of theirs is no buddy to Freedom of the Press. I think he's looking to take on the mantle of Chavez--he sees the light going out there as cancer consumes Hugo, and wants to snatch that popularity and be the new leader of the Nose Tweaking and Fist Shaking Against the Imperialist Pigs Club.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
74. Yeah, yeah.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:22 PM
Aug 2012

Then every country in the world that indexes it's currency to the dollar is a colony. I know, Monroe Doctrine and all, our State Department likes to think that, but if we are not governing and extending our influence there, they are autonomous countries whether you like it or not.

Also, much of the problems of corruption in Latin America can be traced back to the hegemony practiced by Great Britain and the USA in the past two centuries. To put it in a nutshell, those two powers like corrupted officials running things. They are so much easier for us to manage.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
84. No, no--not indexed. The actual DOLLAR.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:51 PM
Aug 2012

They haven't used those sucres in over a decade. They use US dollars. That's how you pay the hotel bill, that's how you pay at the restaurant, that's what you use in the shops. And it's not a nudge-wink thing, that IS the currency, the OFFICIAL currency of the country.

Seriously.

So it ain't "Yeah, yeah..." -- they aren't "indexing." They aren't even TRYING.

And much of the corruption these days can be traced to cronyism in Ecuador, as well as other countries.

There comes a point in time when Correa needs to own his own shit--and he's the architect of plenty of the problems plaguing that place. You could ask the press...but wait--they may not be able to respond, as they are somewhat muzzled!

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
86. We still don't have a government there.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:55 PM
Aug 2012

Their citizens don't vote in our elections like let's say Puerto Rico or the American Virgin Islands. Correa is no different than most leaders of those countries. However, he is standing up to powers that have supported him, us and England and will probably join Chavez in the persona non grata status in the eyes of our country. It will be interesting to see the end results.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
91. We don't WANT a government there--at least not right now.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 03:06 PM
Aug 2012

That place is a mess. Correa's not "standing up" really--he's playing for regional advantage, and he's using the same tired old canards as his dying pal in VZ, only with slightly more sophistication and urbanity than Hugo (he has the advantage of a much better education AND a much better tailor). That makes him appear fresh and new, but it's the same old wall with new paint. He's been on the "eye roll" list in the US for some time already--his conduct is entirely unsurprising given the populist path he's chosen. Hey, he can knock himself out--we'll see how it works out for him over the long haul.

Like it or not, though, Ecuador are tied to us and will stay tied to us until they get their economic shit together (unlikely to happen in a hurry) by way of the greenback.

And like it or not, they signed on to be the Big House Lock-Up for Assange--and they get to foot the bill, too. That's the funny bit, really.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
97. They are tied to us by the dollar, so they are--even if THEY don't like it--a colony of sorts.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 03:31 PM
Aug 2012

If they wanted to be truly free of US influence, they'd start using the Yuan or something.

So long as they are married to our economy, they ARE a colony--an economic colony. So I won't stop saying that, because it is true.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
100. No need to be petty and uncivil. It is possible to disagree without name calling and
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 04:05 PM
Aug 2012

insulting. "I don't agree" would have done just as well.

You should try the high road sometime, and eschew the Jack Nicholson "A Few Good Men" braggadocio. It's very unbecoming and not conducive to a reasoned debate.

Have a lovely day, now.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
75. I think the only realistic option is for the Equadorian gov't & consul to negotiate safe passage.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:24 PM
Aug 2012

The idea of smuggling him out in a diplomatic pouch doesn't seem realistic - the UK can inspect diplomatic pouches if they think they have something in them other than confidential paperwork and official government stuff.

And there's no way to do a helicopter rescue - Equador also has to respect the UK's airspace regulations, and there's no way they'd be allowed to pull such a stunt in downtown London.

Slightly more realistic is the idea of whisking Assange into an official Equadorian diplomatic car - one could argue that the car is part of the embassy, therefore the UK would violate Equador's sovereignty by stopping it, searching it and arresting its occupants. The hard part is getting Assange from the embassy to the car, and from the car to the airplane at Heathrow without being arrested - the real-estate between the embassy and the car and the car and the plane are not protected.

Maybe more realistic is the idea of appointing Julian Assange as a diplomatic courier for Equador, giving him papers which would bestow diplomatic immunity and giving him a diplomatic black bag handcuffed to him full of something unimportant that's related to the Equadorian government and sending him on an assignment to bring those papers to Equador. In theory, the Equadorian ambassador can name whoever he wants as a courier, but the UK might not interpret the Vienna treaty in the same way.

But really, all these ways are just gaming the system, and Equador would lose a lot of credibility if it tried pulling such stunts. So I think what they're going to do is have Julian sit tight, and let the diplomats try to negotiate either safe passage to Equador, or an ironclad promise from Sweden to not extradite, or from the U.S. to not pursue extradition, so Assange can take care of business in Sweden.

But even if Assange makes it to Equador, he's not safe - look what happened to Trotsky in Mexico. Once he's in Latin America, I'm pretty sure the CIA won't have many qualms about trying to whack him...

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
77. All it will do is buy him time. Yes, I believe he will be a hunted man
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:36 PM
Aug 2012

the rest of his life, or at least a couple of administrations up the line in the future.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
87. Safe passage will not be granted. Ecuador has signed on to be Assange's jailer.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:57 PM
Aug 2012

They just haven't quite realized it yet. Or maybe they do realize it--and they're getting a payday for it, playing a drama card, and everyone's calling it a win-win. Who knows? Correa's not stupid--he knows all about milking a situation for publicity, and he's not shy about wheeling and dealing. He wouldn't be the first person to have a public persona that didn't match their private machinations.

If Assange ever made it to Ecuador, he'd be as likely to be murdered in one of those taxi hijackings that are so popular over there as meet a fate at the hands of some nefarious government operative--Quito is a crime-ridden hellhole, and if you look like you have two quarters to rub together, some asshole will target you for robbery and you might well end up dead in the process.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
92. Frankly, Quito will only be a stopover.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 03:08 PM
Aug 2012

He has the resources to hop an airplane there to another South American that country he can't be extradited from. You fail to realize how hated the USA is in SA. There will be safer countries that will step up to the plate to host him if they deem the consequences to them won't be that awful. They love rubbing the USA's face in it.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
103. Which country would you predict he jump to?
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 04:35 PM
Aug 2012

Venezuela? Hugo is near death, and that country is wracked with unrest, violence and shortages. Bolivia? They may not love us, but they rely on us economically in a rather substantial way. Argentina? We're getting along with them MUCH better these days. Same with Chile. Lots of gov-to-gov cooperative efforts. Uraguay? Paraguay? Columbia? Peru? Suriname? Naaah. Too much gov-to-gov cooperation there as well. Brazil? I don't think they'd want him--they are doing very well and don't need his drama one whit, plus, da Silva and Obama seem to get along on a personal level. French Guiana is part of France, so fuggedabout them. That leaves Guyana...and there are a bunch of people there who want that place to become a commonwealth of the US, like PR..so I don't see that working, either.

He could take a straight flight out of SA entirely... to Cuba--but I doubt he'd like that much, either.

I think you are overestimating Assange's ability to find a welcome anywhere other than Ecuador at this point in time--unless he's going to North Korea, perhaps.

In any event, the first hurdle he has to overcome is getting out of Knightsbridge. That, in itself, is a monumental challenge.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
104. It would have to be one without an extradition treaty with the USA and that has the
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 04:39 PM
Aug 2012

least to lose by bucking our State Department. Right now I would have no idea because I don't know how much they are willing to lose. The thing I'm sure about is that most South American countries would like to defy the USA if they could. Cuba might not be that bad of an option for him, but will Raul be as defiant to the USA as Fidel used to be?

MADem

(135,425 posts)
105. Well, I've named them all.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 04:57 PM
Aug 2012

I am pretty sure all of them have extradition treaties with us. Yep: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_extradition_treaties

Heck, we even have an operative extradition treaty with Cuba, such as it is. North Korea, though--he'd be out of reach there.

Of course, extradition and asylum are two different things--but asylum only lasts as long as the person granting it remains in power. It's an uneasy situation.

The country sheltering the guy would have to choose to ignore said extradition treaty--assuming anyone bothered to ask for the guy's extradition--and grant asylum as Ecuador has done vis-a-vis Great Britain and Sweden. I don't think Assange hopping around South America looking for swankier digs--assuming he can get out of Knightsbridge, that is-- is all that easy a proposition, frankly.

Even Ecuador has an extradition treaty with us. But then, we've not yet asked for Assange's extradition, even though he's in "Ecuador" for diplomatic purposes on the first floor of that townhouse in London...

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
106. Apparently some countries who do have treaties with us often choose to ignore them,
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 05:06 PM
Aug 2012

France and Portugal being a couple of them. Ecuador has some kind of treaty but it seems is choosing to ignore it. Paraguay won't extradite Americans sought by the law, but won't let them stay in the country either. How this would affect an Australian being pursued by Americans, I don't know. I wonder why Assange doesn't consider France? It seems like his best bet.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
107. Not often. Occasionally, sure--Ira Einhorn comes to mind, but we got him eventually.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 05:22 PM
Aug 2012

He was wanted for the brutal murder of his girlfriend--stuffed her in a trunk, ran to France and laughed--but he came home when USA took the death penalty off the table.

France is not going to 'diss' their European Union co-member, Sweden. They'd execute an international arrest warrant against Assange so fast he would be in Sweden before he needed to take a crap.

Make no mistake.

KansDem

(28,498 posts)
80. Do something similar to the Flying Elvises.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:42 PM
Aug 2012


Have a hundred or so "Julians" come swarming out of the embassy. It'll confuse the British police and enable the real Julian to escape...

ikri

(1,127 posts)
85. Other
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:54 PM
Aug 2012

The UK could temporarily transfer sovereignty of a small area, like a portion of the offices where the Ecuadorian embassy is based, to Sweden. Sweden could then interview and charge Assange as they desire but they wouldn't be able to transport him outside of the UK. At every stage he could have the Ecuadorian ambassador present and could return to the embassy if it was felt that something was wrong.

There is some precedent for such an action, Camp Zeist in The Netherlands was effectively owned (not just by diplomatic treaty) by Scotland during the Lockerbie trial so the trial could take place in a neutral country but conducted under Scottish law. Every stage of the proceedings could be done in the full light of the world's press, if he so desired, to make sure that there was nothing untoward going on.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
95. Why would UK do that? ECUADOR would need to do that--not UK.
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 03:15 PM
Aug 2012

That way he wouldn't have to leave "Ecuador" to transition to "Sweden."

I imagine there's a bit of nationalistic imperative preventing it--or more likely Swedish law.

I think "physical presence in Sweden" means "physical presence in Sweden." Not "physical presence in a Swedish Embassy or facsimile."

I am no expert on Swedish law, though so who knows?

At the end of the day, as things stand now, Ecuador has been unwittingly persuaded to act as jailers on behalf of Sweden. Assange is now "out of circulation" until he resolves this situation.

librechik

(30,676 posts)
108. TARDIS, of course
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 05:36 PM
Aug 2012

they only have to wait til 2016. It's just the way the script is written.

oh, and remind me to always read the post above mine before posting.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»So how are they going to ...