London's Metropolitan Police arrest Julian Assange Julian Assange has been arrested by London cops at the Ecuadorian Embassy after the nation revoked the asylum it had given him for nearly seven years. BREAKING: #Assange removed from embassy - video pic.twitter.com/qsHy7ZVPg5 — Ruptly (@Ruptly) April 11, 2019 The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) issued a statement this …
Notice who provided the video of his arrest to the BBC? Russians again..
As for the look, I'm thinking it was all part of a cunning plan to escape the embassy and UK in December, by mingling with Harrod's Santas.
I was waiting for someone to note that...
I was thinking, no wonder they kicked him out, if he's let his standards go.
Or maybe the look is to prove there were no sexscapades at the embassy (I'm certainly convinced, looking like that).
He's been in semi-hermitage for nearly a decade, bound to have affected the mind.
He's been in semi-hermitage for nearly a decade, bound to have affected the mind.
Semi-heritage but not isolated from the reports of all the visitors he's had who spent the night. I'm not saying I believe all these reports though given the nature of the press of late.
'What's with the crazy-old-bastard look he's sporting? '
Well, as the mutterings about this eventuality have been getting stronger over the past months, one wonders if he was preparing to do a 'Kimball O'Hara'...he'd the beard sorted for the part, all he needed to do was stain his visible skin the right colour, put on a Jubba Thobe and a Khufi, then slip out of the embassy and merge into the crowds..after all, when watching out for one IC1, one IC4 in mufti looks much like any other IC4..
Alas, the Ecuadorians were (probably|allegedly) getting paid C.O.D...
All joking aside..
He did not look a well man. Which is hardly suprising given his 7 year self-imposed detention, restricted liberty, limited access to exercise, sunlight and generally being surrounded by people who may not have had his best interests at heart.
So now he's 'free' to receive all the rights allowed to prisoners, ie medical and mental health care.. But I'd think rather unlikely to be free any time soon. So UK can give him up to 12 months, then Sweden, and of course the US. And given his past actions, rather unlikely to be released on bail. So depending on how well greased (or braked) extradition proceedings happen, maybe a couple of years in a UK jail, then off to the US & potentially a long spell in one of their Supermax facilities.
All because he decided to get political, rather than stick to simple journalism. I'm curious about the legalities around the journalism aspects, but I think he made a huge mistake editorialising 'Collateral Murder', and making that political. And then his 'help' during the US elections. So along with the alleged sex offences, burned a lot of good will and made some large enemies by becoming the story instead of just reporting it.
"He did not look a well man. Which is hardly suprising given his 7 year self-imposed detention, restricted liberty, limited access to exercise, sunlight and generally being surrounded by people who may not have had his best interests at heart."
But once he is extradited he can get away from London...
maybe a couple of years in a UK jail, then off to the US & potentially a long spell in one of their Supermax facilities.
I'm thinking...no. Not Supermax but possibly the scummiest, darkest place the Feds have. A few words with certain inmates, cigarettes or something else changes and hands, and end of story.
"What's with the crazy-old-bastard look he's sporting? Enquiring minds wish to know if he's been keeping his urine in jars and the Ecuadorians had finally had enough?"
Watching the video of him being carried out, I think he was just refusing to cooperate rather than being so frail as to be unable to walk.
... and was he wearing combat-boots when they carried him out?
There are also the stories of the Embassy staff loosing patience with him smearing excrement over the walls; who does he think he is - Bobby Sands?
> It was obvious the US would get him sooner or later for outing the Deep State dirty "little" operations.
Or, you know, it was obvious that meddling in the US elections (including taking data from the Russians) when the US may or may not want you is a bit of an imbecilic thing to do.
It's quite possible that the US wouldn't have bothered with him when this all started. But rather than holing up in his cupboard, he had to keep prodding the bear.
"Doctor Syntax, be honourable and admit that you got it completely wrong!"
In case you hadn't noticed, when he skipped bail the bail was from a warrant for extradition to Sweden. There was never any mention of a US extradition from the UK. There never any mention of a US warrant for extradition when he was in Sweden.
The report cited near the top of the comments was dated Nov last year and mentions prosecutors being told "over the summer" to go ahead. That's a long, long time after he holed himself up.
It's been complained about many times that the US/UK extradition treaty is extremely one-sided and that accordingly he stood much less chance of being extradited from Sweden. If he really was concerned about extradition to the US he was hardly likely to make the UK his first stop on leaving Sweden.
> In case you hadn't noticed, when he skipped bail the bail was from a warrant for extradition to Sweden
In fact, the story Assange claim was that the Swedish charges were a pretext to get him to Sweden where he could then be shipped onto the US.
Except, the US have now done exactly what they could have done once he entered the UK, and requested him direct from the UK.
This also shows that the story about the USA wanting him extradited to Sweden so he could be spirited away was a load of codswallop which he invented to avoid questioning over sexual misconduct allegations. The USA could always have done what they are doing now, get him direct from blighty.
Just yesterday his leaky org claimed blackmailers had threatened to reveal "sexual" things alongside other details of Assange’s life inside the embassy; the group claimed that miscreants were trying to squeeze €3m out of it.
I get those mails too, suggesting that the non-existent webcam in my 'device' (apparently they don't bother to detect whether it's a laptop, tablet or desktop, and which of the dozen or so it was I allegedly used at the time) can record me fapping, so lack of internet access shouldn't be much of a problem either.
Trump asks Russia to get Clinton's emails.
Russia gives emails to Wikileaks.
Assange thinks that this will help him to be not extradited to the USA.
Assange has proof of Trump's involvement.
If any of the above were true then the usual outcome is "shot while trying to escape" or "dies in custody".
July 12th 2007 Baghdad airstrike video
The sad reality is, is that modern warfare is cowardly, with an awful level of detachment from the consequences. I have a fair idea of what all of this is about, I don't need your opinion.
Collateral Murder, I think this is the one that got Assange firmly in the sights of the US Military Industrial Complex.
The sad reality is, is that modern warfare is cowardly,
I'd say 'confused', or full of shades of grey. IMHO, the unedited video showed the Apache gunner tracking armed individuals as well as the Reuters guys. RPGs were clearly visible, along with AKs. Apache relocates, sees <something> circular/cylindrical poking around the corner that could reasonably have been an RPG... So the gunner engages.
In law, the military has it's RoE (Rules of Engagement) that specify when it's ok to fire. Like when there's a reasonable belief of an imminent, armed threat. Which is generally also the legal view, because there are laws in war. So that was a tragic mistake in the fog of war.
Then the Apache circled around and fired on other targets. IMHO, that was a lot more questionable given weapons weren't obvious. And then the crew fired on the wounded, and the vehicle that arrived. Generally that part is illegal, ie the wounded were no longer a real threat, and the gunner could have held fire & provided cover for the ground troops that were approaching.
But the editing in the 'Collateral Murder' vide was very one-sided, and could have been far better if they'd simply shown the unedited video, and had commentary from a lawyer with war crimes expertise. Despite what we see from Hollywood, finishing off a wounded enemy is generally ilegal. Ok, the threat of suicide bombers makes life riskier, but once an enemy is no longer a threat, you're meant to capture and render aid. Then vigourously interrogate, but that's a different movie..
Jan 2018: Julian Assange is made an Ecuadorian citizen in effort to resolve impasse
Mar 2018: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy
April 2018: Future Uncertain For Assange In Wake Of US-Ecuador Military Deal
June 2018: World Bank approves $400 million in new financing for Ecuador
Feb 2019: IMF agrees to $4.2bn fund for Ecuador | Financial Times
April 2019: Julian Assange: Wikileaks co-founder arrested in London
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
