Skip to main content

View Diary: Your Government Got The Assurances, Julian Assange. Now Get Out Of The Embassy. (182 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Okay, I'm pretty sure your reading comprehension (7+ / 0-)

    is better than this.

    No, I was not talking about Assange.  I was pointing out the quite deep flaw in your argument, i.e. that because Assange would have a whole list of courts to appeal any extradition to, he should - no, not should, must - immediately leave the embassy based upon a newspaper article that says he might not be extradited by Sweden.

    "If you trust you are not critical; if you are critical you do not trust" by our own Dauphin

    by gustynpip on Wed Aug 22, 2012 at 02:27:02 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Not to mention, no one has said Assange shouldn't (5+ / 0-)

      have to stand trial for what he's accused of.  Just because people believe you made a poor argument doesn't mean they believe anything close to that.  

      "If you trust you are not critical; if you are critical you do not trust" by our own Dauphin

      by gustynpip on Wed Aug 22, 2012 at 02:29:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Anyone saying he shouldn't leave is... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        erush1345, vcmvo2, sviscusi

        by definition saying he shouldn't stand trial, because he can't stand trial untul he leaves.  And the whole "trust a newspaper" line is idiotic, because he can verify this with the Australian embassy first thing tomorrow morning.

        •  If the Swedish Government actually said (5+ / 0-)

          Say a writ under signature of the King directly to Mr. Assange or his lawyers that Mr. Assange would be subject only to the jurisdiction of the Swedish courts for the current pending domestic matter and that under no circumstances would he be handed over to a 3rd party country then and only then should Mr. Assange consider leaving the sanctuary that Ecuador has provided.

          The Swedish government so far has refused to directly make those assurances.  Until then, Mr. Assange is within his rights to seek such safety.  

          --Mr. President, you have to earn my vote every day. Not take it for granted. --

          by chipoliwog on Wed Aug 22, 2012 at 04:08:02 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Another bunch of claptrap nonsense. Really. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JesseCW, I give in to sin

          If you're going to take a position, at least try to make it a rational one.  

          First, no one's saying he shouldn't leave.  They're just saying you make a piss poor argument.

          Second, even if someone believes he shouldn't leave right now, it doesn't mean they believe he shouldn't stand trial - it means they believe he shouldn't leave until he can be assured he won't be shipped to the US.  And that doesn't include an assurance made in a newspaper article that says he probably won't be.

          You need a whole lot of work on your analysis skills, friend.  Using an argument that if A is true, then D is true too just doesn't work except with a bunch of kindergartners.  And then only sometimes.

          "If you trust you are not critical; if you are critical you do not trust" by our own Dauphin

          by gustynpip on Wed Aug 22, 2012 at 04:54:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Stand trial for what? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          la urracca

          He hasn't been charged with anything.

          Sweden (ostensibly) only wants him for questioning. He's offered to make himself available for questioning at both embassies, something that reportedly is often done in international inquiries.

          Sweden refuses to cooperate.

          Speak the truth, but ride a fast horse.

          by Deep Harm on Wed Aug 22, 2012 at 05:57:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  They want to hold him in indefinite pre-trial (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Deep Harm

            detention for interrogation.

            The Prosecutor keeps insisting that she can't question him unless he's locked up and cut off from contact with the outside world.  

            She can't explain why, but she's very adamant about this.

            All Cretans are sockpuppets. -- Epimenides the Cretan

            by JesseCW on Thu Aug 23, 2012 at 06:17:35 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Exactly nt (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              expatjourno

              Speak the truth, but ride a fast horse.

              by Deep Harm on Thu Aug 23, 2012 at 09:05:13 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  She's always been free to question him, and then (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Deep Harm, expatjourno

                press charges.

                She's always been free to question him, and then insist that he was not sufficiently cooperative and she still needed to extradite him.

                She's always been free to question him, and then say that his statements do nothing to refute the accusations and she still needs to extradite.

                There was never anything to lose by questioning him...unless she's worried Ecuador might bug the conference room and the results of that might embarrass her...

                All Cretans are sockpuppets. -- Epimenides the Cretan

                by JesseCW on Thu Aug 23, 2012 at 10:27:01 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Interesting possibility (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JesseCW, expatjourno

                  In my experience with whistleblowers and whistleblowing, the harassing party always tries to set up the whistleblower in a venue where the whistleblower has no supporting witnesses, but the harasser has present several people willing to lie on behalf of the organization.  Often, the same organization witnesses show up in multiple whistle bower cases, using exactly the same MO, and sometimes even the same script.  The average person has no idea what goes on behind the walls of a government office.

                  Speak the truth, but ride a fast horse.

                  by Deep Harm on Thu Aug 23, 2012 at 03:17:55 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Yep, can't explain why, except (0+ / 0-)

              they did explain why in the trial report, which you've made quite clear over and over that you've never read, relying only on the defense team and Assange's fanboy echo chamber for information.  The intent of the EAW is to press charges after questioning, and that can't be done outside of Sweden.  Both British courts agreed that there is no point to remote questioning.

              Indefinite pre-trial detention is illegal in Sweden, and beyond that, he could appeal such a case to the ECHR, which would almost certainly be heard, given the profile of his case.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site