11–20 of 173 posts
The Ecudardian embassy/Assange demanded from the Swedes that they agree to something that they legally cannot agree to before interviewing him. It's not really fair to blame the Swedish authorities for that.
I'm curious what that was.
He could have avoided disappointment by allowing the Swedish authorities to question him!
All that time he was stuck in a Norfolk mansion he could have travelled to Sweden been questioned and if he was innocent as he claims be free to travel the world again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are many details regarding this claim and Sweden's (terrible) handling of the negotiations in the Guardian's article: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/aug/11/julian-assange-... Wikileaks published a cable from 2012 detailing Ecuador's invitation to question Assange in the embassy. What took Sweden so long?
Ecuador was requiring that Sweden agree to something that they legally cannot agree to. Update : > “As a condition to let Assange be heard they [Ecuador] have demanded a special agreement in which Sweden recognizes asylum status for Assange. But the government cannot make such a commitment because it is the Migration Board which decides whether or not a person has the right to asylum.” From: http://jackofkent.com/201…
The Ecudardian embassy/Assange demanded from the Swedes that they agree to something that they legally cannot agree to before interviewing him. It's not really fair to blame the Swedish authorities for that.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/aug/11/julian-assange-...
Ecuador had insisted on negotiating a specific agreement with Sweden over the conditions for questioning Assange in the embassy, which would be contrary to the Swedish constitution, Riddselius said last week.
She said Quito had also demanded that Sweden confer upon Assange the same status of political refugee bestowed on him by Ecuador, which had created a fresh obstacle to agreement. This appeared to prompt a statement by the Ecuadorian embassy on Monday: “At no point has the Republic of Ecuador asked the Kingdom of Sweden to grant Mr Assange asylum”.
Particularly in a case like Assange's, where there are accusations of propaganda and lies aimed at multiple players, I dislike repeating unnecessarily vague claims.
(As for the larger issues, I have no useful facts that would allow me to figure out what's going on. But I'd like to avoid muddying the waters any further.)
Oh such crocodile tears… He could have avoided disappointment by allowing the Swedish authorities to question him! All that time he was stuck in a Norfolk mansion he could have travelled to Sweden been questioned and if he was innocent as he claims be free to travel the world again.
The Ecudardian embassy/Assange demanded from the Swedes that they agree to something that they legally cannot agree to before interviewing him. It's not really fair to blame the Swedish authorities for that.
> that they agree to something that they legally cannot agree I'm curious what that was.
From: http://jackofkent.com/2015/08/assange-the-law-of-limitation-... and http://www.thelocal.se/20150807/sweden-hits-out-at-illegal-e...
Basically they want the Government to interfere in another body's decision. Could you imagine if the someone asked the US government (or Obama) to agree that the Supreme Court will find a certain way?
Oh such crocodile tears… He could have avoided disappointment by allowing the Swedish authorities to question him! All that time he was stuck in a Norfolk mansion he could have travelled to Sweden been questioned and if he was innocent as he claims be free to travel the world again.
But wasn't he afraid of extradition?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ecuador was requiring that Sweden agree to something that they legally cannot agree to. Update : > “As a condition to let Assange be heard they [Ecuador] have demanded a special agreement in which Sweden recognizes asylum status for Assange. But the government cannot make such a commitment because it is the Migration Board which decides whether or not a person has the right to asylum.” From: http://jackofkent.com/201…
You've said that in another comment, but haven't stated what that exactly it was
Oh such crocodile tears… He could have avoided disappointment by allowing the Swedish authorities to question him! All that time he was stuck in a Norfolk mansion he could have travelled to Sweden been questioned and if he was innocent as he claims be free to travel the world again.
The reason he didn't travel to Sweden to just get it over with is because Sweden was planning to extradite him.
Oh such crocodile tears… He could have avoided disappointment by allowing the Swedish authorities to question him! All that time he was stuck in a Norfolk mansion he could have travelled to Sweden been questioned and if he was innocent as he claims be free to travel the world again.
It's conspicuous that they didn't.