61–70 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??
They must really want to know if Assange used a condom.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
[deleted]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
[deleted]
About time we started applying the pressure... Assange is taking his supporters for a ride, if he's not guilty why doesn't he go back to Sweden and face the questions? As for this "I offered to talk to the Swedes in the UK" business it's bollocks, since when has law-enforcement done things at the convenience of the 'accused' The whole extradition to the US is a red-herring - have you seen how easy it is to extradite…
In short, because Sweden is a feminist-dominated country which would love nothing more to lock up Assange for life and throw away the key because a couple of women regretted sleeping with him afterwards.
Seriously, they are trying to prosecute him not for rape but for something called "unexpected sex" http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/06/assange-rape-accuser-c...
About time we started applying the pressure... Assange is taking his supporters for a ride, if he's not guilty why doesn't he go back to Sweden and face the questions? As for this "I offered to talk to the Swedes in the UK" business it's bollocks, since when has law-enforcement done things at the convenience of the 'accused' The whole extradition to the US is a red-herring - have you seen how easy it is to extradite…
If he's not guilty, AND this isn't politically motivated, why not just go back? If this is actually politically motivated, then your question is fundamentally no different from "if you're not a terrorist, why don't you just submit to wiretaps / TSA body scans / etc..."
If I was him and I was innocent, I would probably not expect to face fair questions if I went back. The being said, I know almost nothing about the Swedish government so maybe I am being too much of a conspiracy theorist.
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??
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…
I can't imagine Britain would be willing to risk the integrity of its own embassies in that way over Assange. It sounds like sabre-rattling, nothing more.
Consider that they did not even try to enter an embassy over the killing of WPC Yvonne Fletcher by someone at the Libyan embassy - a murder that achieved infamy in Britain. The Metropolitain Police laid siege to the Libyan embassy for 11 days and the government severed all diplomatic ties with Libya. But they did not try to enter.
If Thatcher was not prepared to do it, I very much doubt the current government would be willing to deal with the fallout.