Re: Wiki Leaks Founder Julian Assange granted 'Asylum' in Ecuador
 

It's a good job Assange is only alleged to be a serial rapist and a traitor.

Had he been fitted up on a really serious offence like some trumped up copyright infringement BS the Yanks might well have "persuaded" us to use our SAS to storm the Ecuadorian Embassy to take him out "dead or alive"

:)

Re: Wiki Leaks Founder Julian Assange granted 'Asylum' in Ecuador
 

Good thing that the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987 has been passed for just the purpose of extraditing alleged rapists, and not for minor incidents. It seems wholly proportional to storm the Embassy of a Sovereign Nation in order to ensure that justice is seen to be done.

Re: Wiki Leaks Founder Julian Assange granted 'Asylum' in Ecuador
 

We're legally obliged to arrest him. When he steps on British soil we've have to do it. We can't let it pass. The statement was stupid but it was really only clarifying the law as it stands.

That doesn't matter. Just because you're not charged with a crime doesn't mean your entitled to flee from investigation and any criminal proceedings nor does it mean it's not worth following. How can he be charged or guilty of a crime if he is a fugitive from justice? Sweden cannot charge him until he is caught.

Besides it's not our problem if he is charged with a crime or not. We're simply enacting our legal obligation to arrest him and pack him off to Sweden. He probably has now committed a crime in Britain anyone since he has skipped bail.

There is a good analysis of our 'strong threat' here: http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/po...ssy-be-stormed

Basically we're not storming the embassy but reminding them we can start legal proceedings to revoke their status as an embassy. The justification being that they are misusing their status as an embassy, the author points out that harbouring someone accused of sexual offences probably is gross misuse.

Re: Wiki Leaks Founder Julian Assange granted 'Asylum' in Ecuador
 

But it would no longer be deemed an Embassy of a Sovereign nation. It would just be a house.

You seem to be sarcastically implying that you consider rape to be a 'minor incident', or is that definition just reserved for 'darlings' of the left(eg Strauss-Khan, Polanski)?

Should he and others be able to get away with crimes, even ones such as murder, by simply skipping the country?

Why would the US have to manufacture a criminal offence in order to extradite him?

Re: Wiki Leaks Founder Julian Assange granted 'Asylum' in Ecuador
 

No one has explained to me the logic of the US routing this process via Sweden either...

Re: Wiki Leaks Founder Julian Assange granted 'Asylum' in Ecuador
 

And nobody seems have to said where the phrase "storming the Embassy" came from (which seems a helluva leap from revoking the status).

Re: Wiki Leaks Founder Julian Assange granted 'Asylum' in Ecuador
 

Once the Diplomatic status has been removed, surely it will be 'Stormed' by UK cops. Like any other address, if someone has a warrant for their arrest, and they are refusing to answer the door, the next step usually involves 'storming' the house surely?

Re: Wiki Leaks Founder Julian Assange granted 'Asylum' in Ecuador
 

Storming a normal house to get someone who we're meant to arrest. It won't be storming the embassy nor will it be breaking any international conventions, nor would it be going onto another countries soil. It would be a normal process. However it would take months or years to go though the courts to complete such a process.

As the article I linked to above points out, 'storming the embassy' is far more dramatic than what the UK government said. People to think that government said 'we can go in and get him' when they actually said there is a law that allows them to start proceedings to revoke their embassy in London.

Re: Wiki Leaks Founder Julian Assange granted 'Asylum' in Ecuador
 

Why use a simple accurate phrase when a nice emotive one ups the ante quite nicely?... :D

Re: Wiki Leaks Founder Julian Assange granted 'Asylum' in Ecuador
 

True, but the process of revoking the diplomatic status would be (as far as I know) unprecedented.

I'm not sure what political leaning has to do with anything. I've already stated that I think that Assange is an irresponsible moron. I have absolutely no time for the man. However, in the greater scheme of things, I think that rape (especially in the loose Swedish definition) is a minor offence that does not justify the steps that the UK govenment is suggesting it's considering.

Re: Wiki Leaks Founder Julian Assange granted 'Asylum' in Ecuador
 

Strange - when the Police arrested six terror suspects earlier this year, it was 'an early morning raid', they didn't 'storm their houses'....

Re: Wiki Leaks Founder Julian Assange granted 'Asylum' in Ecuador
 

Do you *really* think that if the US could extert enough control over us or Sweden to guarantee an extradition against his will, that they couldn't do the same to Ecuador?

Re: Wiki Leaks Founder Julian Assange granted 'Asylum' in Ecuador
 

raid:

storm:

Yep. Nothing in common at all...

Re: Wiki Leaks Founder Julian Assange granted 'Asylum' in Ecuador
 

I don't think rape is a minor offence and what is he accused of doing would still be rape here. Sex without the woman's consent.

However it doesn't matter from the UK's point of view. We're not the ones pressing charges. We're executing our legal obligation to extradite him, it's not out job to decide if such a request is serious enough. He has been afforded due process and we have followed the law.

We can't just let it drop.

---------- Post added at 17:56 ---------- Previous post was at 17:54 ----------

Sorry but revoking a embassy status is different to storming the embassy. For a start we wouldn't be breaking any international conventions as you said earlier.

Re: Wiki Leaks Founder Julian Assange granted 'Asylum' in Ecuador
 

But we would be breaking international conventions if we revoked the diplomatic status, and that would be unprecedented. What's more, while rape clearly is a serious crime, we need to weigh up the seriousness of that offence against the unprecedented move of revoking diplomatic status. In that context, I do think that rape is a relatively minor issue. It is not a matter of national safety or something like that, and it's going to look very odd to other nations if the UK is suddenly saying that they will revoke diplomatic status pretty much at will.