Julian Assange loses extradition appeal at Supreme Court
Discussion
AJL308 said:
CoolHands said:
alfaman said:
I wonder if Assange will ever look back on his life and think
“I totally wasted 7 years of my life basically choosing to go to be confined to 1 room ...... to avoid just the possibility of being confined to prison elsewhere (for maybe we’ll under 7 years ).
.... doesn’t strike me as a very intelligent approach
Isn’t the point that he was trying to avoid the trumped up Swedish charges which were designed to get him extradited to USA and a life in supermax, so seems quite sensible.“I totally wasted 7 years of my life basically choosing to go to be confined to 1 room ...... to avoid just the possibility of being confined to prison elsewhere (for maybe we’ll under 7 years ).
.... doesn’t strike me as a very intelligent approach
And if you think the Swedish are apt to making s
t up at the behest of the Yanks you are sorely mistaken. They are the most liberal, wishy-washy lot in Europe and far too concerned with Human Rights than pandering to the US. Edited by Finlandia on Thursday 11th April 13:56
AJL308 said:
p1stonhead said:
Just heard we won’t extradite him to the US? Any truth to that?
We have said consistently, right from the outset that we won't. We can't in any event as Sweden has an application in already and the yanks haven't even made one.His complaint was that he should not be extradited to Sweden because they will give him to the Yanks who will execute him. That is a massive load of b
ks because Human Rights law prevents us extraditing him anywhere where he could face the death penalty and, as he had come from here, Sweden would need permission from us to extradite him anywhere else in any eventIf Sweden reopens the case who gets first dibs when it comes to his extradition, Sweden or the US?
“(Reuters) - A Swedish lawyer representing the alleged victim in a rape investigation involving WikiLeaks' founder Julian Assange said on Thursday she would push to have prosecutors reopen the probe, that was dropped in 2017.”
https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1RN1...
“STOCKHOLM (Reuters) - The Swedish Prosecution Authority said on Thursday it was following developments after WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s arrest in London but that it had yet to take stock of the information.”
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecuador-assange...
“(Reuters) - A Swedish lawyer representing the alleged victim in a rape investigation involving WikiLeaks' founder Julian Assange said on Thursday she would push to have prosecutors reopen the probe, that was dropped in 2017.”
https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1RN1...
“STOCKHOLM (Reuters) - The Swedish Prosecution Authority said on Thursday it was following developments after WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s arrest in London but that it had yet to take stock of the information.”
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecuador-assange...
CoolHands said:
A government can easily find 2 people to make a complaint if needed. I don’t particularly feel the need to defend him but it’s pretty obviously a ruse to get him sent to America which is the ultimate aim.
Why would the Swedish government have to orchestrate a false rape conspiracy to get Assange to then send him to the US? The US could just put a request in directly with the UK, as they apparently have done now.
CoolHands said:
A government can easily find 2 people to make a complaint if needed. I don’t particularly feel the need to defend him but it’s pretty obviously a ruse to get him sent to America which is the ultimate aim.
. You would have to be particularly stupid to think this was ever about the sexual allegations in Sweden.CoolHands said:
IIRC from some years ago, it was because we wouldn’t send him as against human rights or similar as life in a supermax was regarded as inhumane by European courts, or something. That’s as I remember it, I can’t be bothered to check. Hence a stooge country was required.
I could be mistaken, but I am pretty sure those limitations come from the European Convention of Human Rights. The right to life, no torture degrading treatment etc.
If so, it also applies to Sweden who are within Council of Europe, so I can't see how they'd be a 'stooge country'.
We also do extradite people to the US e.g. Abu Hamza. There may be relevant differences between offences etc.
grumbledoak said:
CoolHands said:
A government can easily find 2 people to make a complaint if needed. I don’t particularly feel the need to defend him but it’s pretty obviously a ruse to get him sent to America which is the ultimate aim.
. You would have to be particularly stupid to think this was ever about the sexual allegations in Sweden.La Liga said:
CoolHands said:
A government can easily find 2 people to make a complaint if needed. I don’t particularly feel the need to defend him but it’s pretty obviously a ruse to get him sent to America which is the ultimate aim.
Why would the Swedish government have to orchestrate a false rape conspiracy to get Assange to then send him to the US? The US could just put a request in directly with the UK, as they apparently have done now.
But the more Assange and his conspiraloon supporters muddy the waters the easier it is to spin some stupid conspiracy theory.
It's plainly loopy because if the Swedish were in the pay of the Yanks then why didn't the Yanks just apply to Sweden for his extradition when he was there in the first place? No need to invent a rape (let alone two) just have him arrested on an international arrest warrant.
CoolHands said:
IIRC from some years ago, it was because we wouldn’t send him as against human rights or similar as life in a supermax was regarded as inhumane by European courts, or something. That’s as I remember it, I can’t be bothered to check. Hence a stooge country was required.
That's not correct either as we could not extradite him to somewhere which would extradite him on contrary to his Human rights. And, in fact, I think it is the case that any country we extradited him to would need our permission to extradite him elsewhere.
untakenname said:
In the seven years he was there didn't he even consider trying to escape? He could have worn a disguise or had a body double make a distraction or simply dug a hole in that time.
Having seen him today, he could have walked out in yellow waterproofs as the fking fishermans friend.AJL308 said:
Precisely!
But the more Assange and his conspiraloon supporters muddy the waters the easier it is to spin some stupid conspiracy theory.
It's plainly loopy because if the Swedish were in the pay of the Yanks then why didn't the Yanks just apply to Sweden for his extradition when he was there in the first place? No need to invent a rape (let alone two) just have him arrested on an international arrest warrant.
The combined might of the conspiring US, UK and Sweden couldn't back-channel and get Ecuador to withdraw his asylum in 7 years out prior to Sweden discontinued the investigation (with one allegation running out of time). But the more Assange and his conspiraloon supporters muddy the waters the easier it is to spin some stupid conspiracy theory.
It's plainly loopy because if the Swedish were in the pay of the Yanks then why didn't the Yanks just apply to Sweden for his extradition when he was there in the first place? No need to invent a rape (let alone two) just have him arrested on an international arrest warrant.
Adrian W said:
im glad the overworked under resourced police have time for this.
What else do they do with someone who a warrant exists for? AJL308 said:
That's not correct either as we could not extradite him to somewhere which would extradite him on contrary to his Human rights.
And, in fact, I think it is the case that any country we extradited him to would need our permission to extradite him elsewhere.
Another wooden spoon prize! This time for being completely oblivious (perhaps you're just 'forgetful') to illegal movements of all sorts of troublesome types. CIA snatching people off the streets in Italy, Sweden's complicity re the Egyptians, those N379P landings in Scotland that Jack Straw feigned ignorance of...etc.And, in fact, I think it is the case that any country we extradited him to would need our permission to extradite him elsewhere.
For those (La Liga) trying to deflect with the 'crazy conspiracy nonsense', here's a quote:
JackStraw said:
Unless we all start to believe in conspiracy theories and that the officials are lying, that I am lying, that behind this there is some kind of secret state which is in league with some dark forces in the United States, and also let me say, we believe that [U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice] is lying, there simply is no truth in the claims that the United Kingdom has been involved in rendition full stop.
Which was later shown to be false: Belhadj, Boudchar and many others we don't know about (because we were careful not to ask any questions about the 'passengers' in those aircraft).You want more? How about the debacle when the US government persuaded the French, Spanish and Italian governments to force a presidential plane to land in Europe to try to catch Snowden?
Escapegoat said:
For those (La Liga) trying to deflect with the 'crazy conspiracy nonsense', here's a quote:
You could argue that deflection is providing unrelated examples and quotes. I don't think anyone is saying that governments aren't capable and haven't done shady things in the past, so the quotes don't serve to counter anything anyone has written.
The premise that multiple governments (over 7 years so there's been the 'handing over' of the conspiracy) along with multiple judiciaries, are willing to conspire against an individual, is what seems flawed to me. That and the best way they could manage was a convoluted mess which means they've not got what they wanted. So they're able to keep this from leaking (with actual evidence) despite it involving so many people over such a long time, but not able to put together better plan and weren't able to lean on Ecuador with withdraw his asylum earlier.
Sounds more likely than there simply being a couple of sexual offence investigations...
Ultimately if you and others are asserting that there's a deviation from the norm (legal processes etc aren't being correctly followed), then it's down to you to prove.
La Liga said:
Escapegoat said:
For those (La Liga) trying to deflect with the 'crazy conspiracy nonsense', here's a quote:
You could argue that deflection is providing unrelated examples and quotes. I don't think anyone is saying that governments aren't capable and haven't done shady things in the past, so the quotes don't serve to counter anything anyone has written.
The premise that multiple governments (over 7 years so there's been the 'handing over' of the conspiracy) along with multiple judiciaries, are willing to conspire against an individual, is what seems flawed to me. That and the best way they could manage was a convoluted mess which means they've not got what they wanted. So they're able to keep this from leaking (with actual evidence) despite it involving so many people over such a long time, but not able to put together better plan and weren't able to lean on Ecuador with withdraw his asylum earlier.
Sounds more likely than there simply being a couple of sexual offence investigations...
Ultimately if you and others are asserting that there's a deviation from the norm (legal processes etc aren't being correctly followed), then it's down to you to prove.
It’s also clear that there is much more than a couple of sexual offence investigations; were unlikely to ever be given the truth on that one especially if Assange is now silenced.
I loved today’s comments:
“Finding him guilty, District Judge Michael Snow said Mr Assange's behaviour was "the behaviour of a narcissist who cannot get beyond his own selfish interest".”
I can’t think of a politician or lawyer who doesn’t perfectly fit that description, which is why Assange is in the s
t in the first place. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff