BREAKING NEWS: Police are massing at the Ecuadorian embassy in London where Australian WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is holed up after his request for political asylum.WikiLeaks tweeted this morning that two large police vans had arrived ‘‘to surround the Ecuadorian embassy in London’’ about midnight, local time.
One person stationed outside the embassy, identifying himself as a "citizen journalist" with the twitter account https://twitter.com/alburyj,is video streaming the action.
Source: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politi...816-249pe.html
RIP Assange
I was wondering how they could 'raid' an embassy
these tweets cleared it up
for anyone else wondering:
David Allen Green @DavidAllenGreen
It looks like that UK is not threatening to enter an embassy (it cannot); but instead find a way of removing its embassy status. Extreme.
David Allen Green @DavidAllenGreen
Once the premises ceases to be an embassy, then UK can enter it. But terminology important here. UK will/should not enter an embassy,
I call people I don’t like ‘rock eaters’ because it makes them question their very existence. Some will wonder why I called them a rock eater and this will torture them to the very end, even though they have never eaten a rock. Others will remember the time they ate a rock and feel ashamed and confused.
Article now includes the following:
The British government has told Ecuadorian authorities it believes it can enter its embassy in London and arrest Assange.
But any incursion by the Brits at the embassy would be ‘‘without modern precedent’’ and could end up before the international courts, according to an Australian law expert.
Professor Donald Rothwell, from Australlian National University College of Law, said the government's stance shows just how serious the UK is about extraditing the WikiLeaks founder to Sweden.
"The Ecuadorian Embassy enjoys protection under Article 22 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations which precludes the United Kingdom authorities from entering the Embassy without consent. Assange has enjoyed the protection of the embassy since he sought asylum there on 19 June 2012.
"If the United Kingdom revoked the Embassy’s diplomatic protection and entered the Embassy to arrest Assange, Ecuador could rightly view this as a significant violation of international law which may find its way before an international court.”
Utter BS, and I imagine unprecedented, and all for what?
The issue itself is pretty fascinating and disgusting. He would technically be protected if he could make his way into a diplomatic car without being intercepted by the police. Apparently the building is structured in a way in that he has to physically walk outside and into a car park (which does not officially form part of the embassy) to get into a vehicle. I'm guessing they're free to arrest him then, since the Supreme Court ruled that the warrant to arrest him was valid. I'm not sure if they could even get him to Ecuador if they give him political asylum.
There has also been talk of making him an official diplomat so that he has access to diplomatic immunity. I'm not so sure if that's even possible, let alone probable, but it would be an interesting twist.
Edit: There have also been threats made against the UK Embassy in Tunisia. Apparently activists are ready to storm it if the Ecuadorian embassy is raided or stripped of its status.
Last edited by Azure; 16 Aug 2012 at 2:35 PM.
he should have went to the russians/chinese. but then they'd probably tell him to fuck off so...
Imagine the UK attempting to bully Russia in the same way... lol.
Because nobody fucks with Russia.Originally Posted by abbeyroad
If the US really have the guts to arrest him..... why create a fake charge of sexual assault in sweden...... fuck
IM GARY OAK
Word on twitter is that asylum has been granted
Excellent news, but how on earth are they going to get him out? I was kind of hoping for an announcement stating that he was already in Ecuador and not even in the embassy.
Well, the bit I heard from the FM (or whoever the Ecuador guy is)
suggested that they gave him full citizenship of Ecuador and mentioned their ability to grant people the status of diplomat, so.......
Last edited by townie; 17 Aug 2012 at 12:02 AM.
I find I'm torn on Assange. I don't like him as a person at all but I like what he has done. I think he should face trial in Sweeden but not the US.
All I'm really sure of is that it does set a dangerous precedent if Britain revokes embassy status to Ecuador to take Assange. Once that happens, other, far less democratic countries will feel able to do the same. And you just know that Britain will kick up a fuss when the Chinese do the same to an embassy of theirs sometime down the track.
Thing that is most concerning to me is that Sweden will not guarantee that he will not be extradited to the USA.
Even China respected long standing international law in respect to the inviolability of embassies when Chen Guangcheng recently sought asylum from the US in the US Embassy in Beijing. In the end they even allowed him passage to the US. Even General Pinochet respected it.
What the UK is considering is disgraceful, especially from a democratic western nation.
As for Australia's role, I've heard many saying Assange should not be given special treatment. How about he receives the same level of representation as the Government has been willing to provide convicted drug smugglers in Indonesia?
The recent 4 corners episode (it's on iview) exposes the nature of the allegations against Assange and the concerning actions of the swedish prosecutor's office. I recommend all watch it.
Last edited by Rafy; 17 Aug 2012 at 8:11 AM.
It is sad that this man has done the right thing but is being punished because he simply revealed others wrongdoing. Everyone knows it but I needed to say it.
I have no opinions on the sex charges and whether where he should or shouldn't be extradited, but completely agree with townie on that it is a very dangerous to remove an embassy. Am surprised UK are even considering option despite claiming all actions will abide by international law.
Rafy, is iview avaliable to overseas or
like most autistic people, i have an intense, almost sexual, love for trains
Doing a sniff test its easy to tell something stinks... would the UK go all the way to raiding an embassy and disrespecting the sovereignty of a country for the simple fact of extraditing an apparent rapist... I personally think it is just empty threat by the UK, however, I believe the UK really needs to start treading lightly because it may place distrust from countries with fragile diplomatic relations with the UK... The fact he would be extradited for espionage also puzzles me... the chap is a journalist not a spy...
I am in support of what Julian Assange is doing, however, cowering in an Equedorian embassy is not going to solve any thing... I feel more sympathy for Bradley Manning... 24 year old, being held in solitary confinement without charge while the person responsible cowers away with asylum that's pretty rat...
also lol at all the protesters saying keep your hands off Ecuador... it is built on the sovereign land of the UK... its not their land...
Didn't the UK do the same shit as Ecuador with that Russian Journalist (Alexander Litvinenko) who was assassinated by the Russians... at the end of the day the UK behaviour is just as flippant as the behaviour of the Russians during that time... I'm sensing quite a double standard...
Last edited by wannaspoon; 17 Aug 2012 at 10:44 AM.
Educational History:
Swinburne University of Technology: Advanced Diploma of Business (Legal Practice) [COMPLETE]
Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology: Bachelor of Social Science (Legal & Dispute Studies) [COMPLETE]
Victoria Law School: Bachelor of Laws (Graduate Entry) [KILL ME NOW!]
I doubt they would strip ecuador of it's embassy status. Think of the shitstorm that would ensue.
I won't give up on us
Regardless of how serious they are about following through, it's a pretty big deal that the *UK* of all places would consider/threaten that.
Also wannaspoon, firstly, no I don't and you've answered your own question. He is hiding out there because there is a chance he would be extradited to USA for espionage, when he merely provided a host for other peoples leaks.
like most autistic people, i have an intense, almost sexual, love for trains
This is my view on him as well.
Why does your judgement of him as a person even matter? Especially considering all you know of him and his persona has been shaped and rorted by the media.
If Sweden and the US offered a guarantee that he would not be extradited to the US, then I would probably be critical of him for hiding in the embassy. They have been asked to provide such guarantees on several occasions by both the Ecuadorian government and Assange. On each occasion they have blatantly refused. The Swedish government was offered the opportunity to interview Assange at the embassy and this offer was also refused. An offer was made by Assange to stand trial via video link and this offer was refused.
So then, why is the UK government willing to take the extreme step of stripping an embassy of its status (something that is virtually without modern precedent) and incur the risk of breaching the Vienna Convention to apprehend a man who has not been charged with any crimes?
Imagine the consequences this would have on embassies around the world. The next time somebody seeks refuge in a UK (or any) embassy, the government in the relevant country can strip the embassy of its status and use this case as an example. This would basically destroy the protection historically offered under embassies, which was even respected in the Cold War.
q. why ecuador?
I call people I don’t like ‘rock eaters’ because it makes them question their very existence. Some will wonder why I called them a rock eater and this will torture them to the very end, even though they have never eaten a rock. Others will remember the time they ate a rock and feel ashamed and confused.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks