21–30 of 287 posts
Isn't that basically an act of war? Or something just short of it? I can't remember another time when one country threatened to enter another country's embassy without an invitation... Have there been other cases like this in recent history??
Isn't that basically an act of war? Or something just short of it? I can't remember another time when one country threatened to enter another country's embassy without an invitation... Have there been other cases like this in recent history??
I can't remember another time when a country used the diplomatic immunity of their embassy to harbor a fugitive from rape charges. We're in fairly uncharted territory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
I would use the same terms to describe any fugitive on the run from rape charges. What on earth does Sweden have to gain or lose from this? This is just conspiracy theory.
There is another possibility: Theoretically, both the women might be paid by CIA when Assange is extradited for questioning. But that is just another stupid conspiracy theory.
Edit: Clarity.
Edit 2: It is hard to take the arguments seriously, since Assange originally went to Sweden voluntarily without fearing extradition to USA. Wikileaks should just get a saner guy as front figure.
If the UK really is threatening that, then that is more evidence that the Swedish charges are politically motivated rather than being from an actual crime.
If the UK really is threatening that, then that is more evidence that the Swedish charges are politically motivated rather than being from an actual crime.
Why is there this willingness to believe everything this idiot says? He’s a pompous ass, pure and simple. No conspiracy required.
Meanwhile the idea of an anonymous leaks platform dies because everyone focuses on his stupid antics.
It is like a movie not real life.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the article: "The law which Britain is threatening to invoke in the Assange case is the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987. It allows the UK to revoke the diplomatic immunity of an embassy on UK soil, which would potentially allow police to enter the building to arrest Mr Assange." If they do that it wouldn't be an act of war, it would be legal. It definitely sets a terrible precedent though and even if i…
Do you honestly believe Ecuador will initiate hostilities against NATO in order to protect a foreign citizen from due legal process in that persons home country? It would surely be less effort and risk to lift him from the roof by helicopter and whisk him to a waiting jet James Bond style. The second option seems far more likely to me.
If the UK really is threatening that, then that is more evidence that the Swedish charges are politically motivated rather than being from an actual crime.
Can you explain this? In what way is it evidence in regards to the Swedish charges.
Based on recent cases of extradition to the USA examination of the charges is not made locally?
If the UK really is threatening that, then that is more evidence that the Swedish charges are politically motivated rather than being from an actual crime.