Ecuador says 'yes' to Assange 'freedom' deal, but Julian says 'nyet' Wikileaks alumnus Julian Assange has apparently turned down a proposed deal that would have seen him leave the Ecuadorian embassy he has been camped out in for over six years. The government-secrets spaffing outfit on Friday confirmed that it would not be taking a deal that Ecuador has struck with the UK that would have given …
No need. They can just ask him to leave. If he doesn't? I'm sure they can get a copper or two to pop over and help.
The only problem is the PR. Once you've granted him asylum and claimed you're his heroic defender against the evil capitalist running-dogs - then it's a tad embarrassing to climb down and kick him out anyway.
They don't let you take cats to prison, however there are programs where the cons are used to train service dogs.
The truth, Assange will not get the death penalty. (Assuming he was assisting Manning during the actual theft.
The other truth... he'll be asked about the DNC theft and the Clinton's don't want him talking.
He may not make it to trial alive.
Cue the private security black ops going to take him out... and its not going to be Trump's dong.
"Cue the private security black ops going to take him out... and its not going to be Trump's dong."
Hilarious typo aside, you've been watching too many crap action-spy pictures. You need to watch something with nice people in it instead.
Queue the tabloid and Fauxnews muppets virtue signalling and regurgitating their echo chambers
In a world where deceit is universal, having an independent thought is revolutionary
I dare them to try thinking for themselves, even if only once in their lifetimes
I won't hold my breath though, some people are addicted to untruths covered in bile
I won't ask them to try critical thought, because their heads would implode and would make a right mess on the floor
Bullshit. They offered him a deal where he won't face the music in the US and he STILL won't leave. I think he is staying for the attention at this point. Let him rot there, until Ecuador decides to put him out on the street.
I think he should reconsider the offer. If they kick him out on the streets anything can and probably will happen.
Then again, there might be a battle between attention whores and the US will haul him off and silence him to let the other attention whore have all the headlines. While I'm attempting a joke about this part, truth is stranger than fiction so...
Sorry, wishful thinking on your part. The house republicans made an absolute joke of their constitutionally required oversight rule, by not asking any tough questions, making anyone who would provide uncomfortable answers testify behind closed doors, not issuing any subpeonas, and accepting a laughable standard of "executive privilege" that - had Clinton tried it during the Benghazi hearings - would have caused Sean Hannity's head to explode!
There will be REAL oversight in less than a month, and between that and Mueller's probe connecting him with his first (of no doubt many) felonies, he knows it is just a matter of time before he does the following:
1) his own version of the 'Saturday night massacre' firing Mueller, Rosenstein, and the entire SDNY office, and ordering all evidence collected by Mueller and the SDNY destroyed
2) pardons himself and his family for all crimes ever committed in their entire lives, because it is the things that he did before he ran that the SDNY is now investigating are starting to worry him more than the things he did during his campaign
3) resigns, claiming "I've done everything I set out to do as president so its time to get back to the business world"
4) a few years from now is convicted of tax evasion and other crimes by the state of NY, but no doubt he'll skate by like most white collar criminals and be given probation instead of the jail time he deserves due to his age and the desire to avoid a political firestorm
'DougS: “Bullshit. They offered him a deal where he won't face the music in the US” ..
Where did you read that, my reading of the situation is: Moreno would hand Assange over to the British who would extradite Assange to the US with the understanding Assange would not face the death penalty. This has nothing to do with a $400 million loan from the World Bank.
"my reading of the situation is: Moreno would hand Assange over to the British who would extradite Assange to the US with the understanding Assange would not face the death penalty. "
The UK would not extradite him to the US anyway. Sweden has first call on him. If the UK were, for some obscure legal reason, able to skip the Swedes and accede to a US extradition order, it would require the US to guarantee to no death penalty under any circumstances. The US/UK extradition treaty may well be unbalanced in the US favour, but there is no way the UK would extradite to anywhere where the charges could result in the death penalty being applied.
REF: "Bullshit. They offered him a deal"
Wait what?
Are you saying that the USA is a country to be trusted?
I think YOU'RE looking for attention
I suspect in YOUR world, albeit it one you absorbed from the MSM without question, is that 9/11 was as it happened according to the MSM and the resulting aftermath was because of terrorists, and not corporate oil interests. The USA is a country who would happily turn a blind eye of a murdered journalist, because of money interests and carry on, business as usual. I mean why risk BILLION $ in weapons contracts
I think you're very naive to think that Julian Assange is anything other than a political prisoner in the United Kingdom
I suspect in YOUR world, albeit it one you absorbed from the MSM without question, is that 9/11 was as it happened according to the MSM
Seriously, can you tinfoil hatters move on to something else and give this a rest? You have no idea how offensive it is to those of us that were in lower Manhattan that day to have your sort witter on about this in fact free ignorance of the actual events.
They offered him a deal where he won't face the music in the US and he STILL won't leave
To be fair, and I prefix this by pointing out he's guilty as hell, he's been assured he won't be extradited to a country where he'll be executed. Two problems with this - firstly it would be illegal to extradite him to the US (not to mention a PR shitshow) if he faced execution. Second point is he doesn't face execution for what he's on the hook for.
The problem Assange has is Mueller is about to indict him for being ground zero in the whole Russia gets Trump elected thing, and there's an entire political class in the US (and outside it) who are going to have very serious problems with cognitive dissonance over it. When that happens Ecuador isn't going to have much choice but to throw him out on the street, the US will suddenly start giving a damn and the amount of pressure the US will bring to bear on them will make it impossible to resist. That will confuse a bunch of folks because they think that either the UK or US give a damn now, when in fact he's basically imprisoned himself, he's quarantined.
I have good news for Assange though - if he knows anything and isn't just a Russian patsy then he has a get out of jail free card he can play although I strongly suspect he doesn't in which case oh dear.
Oh: and by the way, double down and double up mean different things.
Yeah, I don't know where this FUD about his being potentially subject to the death penalty in the US is coming from. ...oh wait, I do know. From Assange and his mouth-pieces.
Even if they decide that Assange isn't a journalist, and is trying to extort the US govt with threats about their information, none of that is subject to a death penalty for anyone, much less a foreign national, FFS.
> Even if they decide that Assange isn't a journalist, and is trying to extort the US govt with threats about their information, none of that is subject to a death penalty for anyone, much less a foreign national, FFS.
Bear in mind US political types wanted him charged with Treason. He's not even American.
So you can see how some people would be sceptical that the reality of "laws" would stop the US government doing whatever it wants. Laws haven't managed to stop them for many other matters.
Kim Dot Com comes to mind as another blatant case-in-progress... where laws appear to have been completely ignored by the US quest for doing damage to someone they don't like.
"They offered him a deal where he won't face the music in the US"
To be fair, they might have made that sound like a new special deal they'd made up just for him, but that's standard UK policy. We don't have the death penalty, and so we won't extradite anyone to a country where they are likely to get the death penalty.
Nothing stopping them from either extraditing him to Sweden or Australia where they might be more willing, or asking the US to pinky swear that the worst he'll get is life imprisonment, which is all it would take to get past the "no death penalty" requirement.
Either way he's still got to serve six months in HMP for bail jumping before he goes anywhere else.
He revealed the wrongdoing of powerful people, for all his faults he deserves to be able to live somewhere without fear of prosecution.
The man has broken the law and sought to justify it later with Wikileaks. He then proceeded to violate someone else's rights (the two girls), broke the law again and tried to play politics (badly) to enable probably the worst president to ever foul the White House (making Bush Jr look good by comparison) so I don't see why he deserves any slack.
He may overestimate his own worth, but let's just say that his view is fortunately shared by fewer and fewer people, especially those who supplied his bail money..
I see the confusion, you assumed I meant something like "cue stage right" like as in a pantomime
I actually did mean queue, as in a line of people waiting for something
I know the current situation is very much like a pantomime, but I am very much talking about reality, and I dont mean the reality presented to you by the establishments news desks
Anyway, thank you for the correction even if it was misguided. I am quite happy to be corrected where I am wrong, if it can be backed up with something credible
I actually did mean queue, as in a line of people waiting for something
Queue isn't a verb which can be used like that. You can only have come to that usage by mistaking it for cue, which can be used in that form and which you've no doubt heard spoken many times. Hope that helps.
Bloody hell, why am I bothering with a minor grammatical error? Well, probably because I know that dismantling your Trumpian-level nitwittery will have absolutely no effect upon you. Never mind. Us sheeple will just bugger off and leave you to it.
Shit my mistake, I of course do not know what I meant, and only you know
Can I get your contact details so I can run my thoughts through you to get clearance?
Exactly, why are you bothering about a grammatical error thats exists only in your head?
I meant queue, I typed queue, if I had intended to type cue I would have typed cue, if I had intended to type que, I also would have typed que. Which part of this do you not understand?
"I meant queue, I typed queue, if I had intended to type cue I would have typed cue, if I had intended to type que, I also would have typed que. Which part of this do you not understand?"
Presumably he doesn't understand how someone can get something so badly wrong, and then double-down on their error.
I'm surprised you haven't blamed your mistake on the deep state, or the Nelson Mandela effect.
@Jamie Jones
Seems pretty basic to me that if you double something then you increase it or raise it UP, viz the English expression "doubling up"
"Double down" makes no sense IMO and only seems to have appeared recently. Presumably it's an Americanism that's trying to ooze its way in over here.
It should be placed in the 'Rejected' bin, along with 'Gotten', 'Nite Club', 'Donut', etc. - oh, and 'Herb', when pronounced (in English) without the 'H' .
'arry 'oudini sat in the 'erb garden - Yes or No?
(Cockneys kindly ignore)
> "double down" makes sense. You lose a bet, then place the same bet again... that's
> doubling down (probably soon to be "doubly" down).
AFAIK gamblers who double down (or double up), e.g. at the roulette wheel, usually don't last long; either they run out of money or they are "invited" to leave the casino and not come back.
There's a bet in Blackjack called double down, or doubling down. When dealt two cards totaling ten or eleven you may double your bet and you get one more "down card", i.e. a card dealt to you face down that nobody else can see. (For the card counters.) Often the odds are good to be dealt a ten or a face card and thus a good chance of either winning or tying with the dealer.
> "Double down" makes no sense
Double Down is a bet in Black Jack, where it does make sense. It appears to have entered the lexicon as a synonym for Double Up much the same way that "I could care less" has become an acceptable* alternative for "I couldn't care less."
> 'arry 'oudini sat in the 'erb garden - Yes or No?
Are you French? I had a French colleague once who could not voice the Haitches in any word. Not for love nor money. I have met nitwits who pronounce the Haitch in Herbs and Spices. My SiL's father is Herb(ert), pronounce the Haitch please. AFAIK Harry Houdini pronounced the Haitches in both of his names, but he's not around for me to ask. I believe I've heard Ms. Rowling (rhymes with bowling) pronounce the Haitch in Harry Potter.
*Well, acceptable for some perhaps. Probably only to those who use it.
@Cardinal - I admit, I inherited "double-down" from the American political channels.
However, along with what Frumious Bandersnatch says, if making an error is "down", then doubling 'up' on it is doubling down.
I largely agree with the rest of your post, (and I didn't downvote you)
Maybe I should stop using Americanisms... My bad. Have a nice day :-)
Coming from a non-English speaking country I can only offer an outsider's anecdotal, strictly non-academic (and at least somewhat impartial) perspective, but to be honest I have encountered "double" or "double down" used plenty of times yet I have never, ever heard or read "double up" before today. Which is not a comment on what may "officially" be right or wrong - just a remark offered at face value...
"Coming from a non-English speaking country"
Which country would that be, if you don't mind me asking?
One tends to work out - or guess - where some of the posting regulars are from..
Whilst I initially had you down as Australian (yes, too obvious) I long since had you pegged for British.
I'd love El Reg to show the country code of posters.
I'd love El Reg to show the country code of posters.
I fear that won't help you much in my case as I travel a lot :)
Me is also no Englisch Nasjional but it's not that noticeable when I speak*, I just have the occasional glitch in my written use of English. That said, I never sell myself as a native, irrespective of the language I am speaking (I speaketh several, and I assume probably all of them badly :) ).
That said, my sense of humour is finely attuned to the darker British variant, having grown up on a diet of Fawlty Towers, a bit of Fry & Laurie, Monty Python, Not the Nine O'clock News and Rowan Atkinson's later episodes of Black Adder, and I have no problem with understanding the full content of the earliest Cambridge Footlights (The Letter and the chess game being my favourites), and, despite being exposed to the German language I still Do Not Use Capitals Inappropriately (it would only be for nouns anyway, but just the sheer wear on the shift key would annoy me).
It also means I am a tad more relaxed about mizspelt words as long as they don't deliberately seek to obscure meaning, I am with Stephen Fry on this..
So, you can have your flags, but it may tweak any prejudices exactly the wrong way. Which, I may add, could actually amuse me :).
* I am in awe of people who can mimic manners of speech and accents, a skill I do not possess.
I meant queue, I typed queue, if I had intended to type cue I would have typed cue, if I had intended to type que, I also would have typed que. Which part of this do you not understand?
So you're just a moron then? "Cue" - a signal for something to start. "Queue" - an ordering of items. You clearly used the former meaning and the latter spelling, why are you still arguing about how clever you are?
[Edit - go on then, which of those comes first in your "queue"?
Queue the tabloid and Fauxnews muppets virtue signalling and regurgitating their echo chambers]
I suppose you could use the verb form of queue in that context, in which case the sentence would have the sense of some outside party arranging the muppets in a line. Bearing in mind the apparent tin foil hat belief system of the poster, he/she possibly thinks its the CIA placing all their muppets in line.
It does give us an insight into the poster though: rather than admit : "OK I typed queue instead of cue, so what, bite me" we have this aggressive posturing to defend the basically indefensible. Now I think of it that does seem awfully appropriate...
"Shit my mistake, I of course do not know what I meant, and only you know"
You may well know what you mean. But if you can't communicate your meaning in a reliable and accepted manner, is it any wonder that no one else knows what you mean?
This post has been deleted by its author
"Queue isn't a verb which can be used like that."
Crikey, dont ever visit this site, exposure to etymology might make your head implode
@Gerry 3:
> Queue isn't a verbI queued for a bus: that makes 'queue' a verb in my book.
Can you explain why you truncated your quote of what I said after just four words? Could it be that if you'd quoted all of my statement your dismally limited attempt at a point wouldn't stand?
> Us sheeple will just bugger off...Nope, should be 'We sheeple...'.
There's this thing called colloquial usage. Sometimes even respected authors have been known to use it. Now I'm not a respected author in the class of John Steinbeck or even Irvine Welsh, but I am at least aware of their existence. And if the concept of rhetorical devices has passed you by, I am so sorry.
Don't expect me to agree. You've just demonstrated once again your lack of comprehension regarding the nuances of English, thinking your tortured example is in some way shedding light on the matter. Go find a primary school teacher willing to spend an hour or two to explain it to you.
Look, I understand, you buy newspapers, you read newspapers
I suspect you probably also frequent a pub too, and talk to people in the pub
I can easily imagine you have a social media account of some kind and get all of your facts from there
Echo chambers are a wonderful thing, until someone from outside your echo chamber challenges your world view.
As to digging a hole, I literally have no idea what exactly you're referring to.
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=queue
Sorry, I dont do cliques, maybe you do...
re Cue, not queue.
One of the things i like about the comments section of The Register is the wide range of comments made from people around the world. Many of whom do not have English as their mother tongue, though of which many have a much better grasp/use of the English language and grammar than i have.
The last time i read "Right on queue" was on Twitter from a young woman who also proudly posted her "First Class Degree" certificate, in English Language, from Sheffield Hallam University (formerly known as Sheffield Polytechnic - when i was there, lol). Hardly a typo is it.
Not bad for £40,000 debt eh?
Edited to add in *in English Language*.
Please show me any other political prisoner sitting in a place where they can just walk out whenever they want to. Please. You're insulting political prisoners like Assange has insulted proper asylum seekers with his attempts to evade the consequences of his own -avoidable- actions.
"Please show me" your face, AC
Have a packet of these it looks like you need them
"Assange is a political prisoner, in the United Kingdom, end of "
He's not a prisoner, neither political nor otherwise, and never has been. At worst, he was under house arrest in a stately home until he skipped bail and self-imprisoned himself in the embassy.
He's not a prisoner, neither political nor otherwise, and never has been.
However, despite all his many machinations to avoid it, he is likely to be one in the future -hopefully the very near future- so we can go back concentrating on real problems and the odd cat video.
Queue
It's "cue". A queue is a line of people. A cue is a prompt. When you queue things up in a process, you only cue up the one thing at the front of the queue.
But you have "independent thought" so you probably don't call it "English". Carry on.
How does he support himself when not an embassy guest?
On sunlight and love of his fellow man.
IIRC, it was alleged indiscriminate love of his fellow humans that got him into this fix. Edward ended up in Russia, poor Chelsea ended up in The Glass House. Exile or clink, they live with the consequences of their conscience every day and the world is at least a more honest place because of their sacrifice.
Julian's predicament, on the other hand, was wholly avoidable and came about as a result of something which had no contributive effects for humanity or Wikileaks at all: Him getting his end away. Without that, Sweden would have had no grounds to issue the arrest warrant - which not even Malfoy Major himself has suggested is outside the bounds of due process - and we wouldn't be hearing about this attention whore's antics every week.
“Wikileaks alumni Julian Assange has apparently turned down a proposed deal that would have seen him leave the Ecuadorian embassy he has been camped out in for over six years.”
The deal being essentally worthless .. we'll extradite you but not to face the death penality.
“after six and a half years of confinement to the building, Assange is starting to wear on the South American nations nerves.”
Or else the financial bribes and threats are beginning to have an effect.
“The road is clear for Mr. Assange to take the decision to leave,” Mr. Moreno said, citing written assurances he said he had received from Britain.”
Wikileaks editor says media is giving the U.S. cover to extradite him
Ecuador-US Security Deal: Is President Lenín Moreno Opening Door for US military presence?
World Bank approves $400 million in new financing for Ecuador ...
"World Bank approves $400 million in new financing for Ecuador "
Can we clarify this? Are you saying that the US, via the World Bank, is paying $400 million to have Assange extradited?
I'm sure Assagne would love that interpretation - it must be getting close to his own evaluation of himself.
Lets get some perspective here for the benefit of all of the mindless drones with short memories that seem to be on this site (I feel bad saying that, but it's become pretty apparent)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0
The President during Operation Overlord, as part of his exit speech to the American people as president, warned of the military industrial complex.
Accused of rape, skipped bail, scarpered to an embassy. Just follow the law. And besides, neglecting his cat tells you all you need to know. I suspect Trump has a pardon for him in any case if he were to get a free trip overseas.
Maybe he should apply for the Sports Ambassador to the CAR? I believe Boris Becker is no longer interested and the diplomatic immunity could be handy.
"Accused of rape, skipped bail, scarpered to an embassy. Just follow the law."
How do you feel about Snowden? He'd probably be convicted of treason, yet most people are delighted for him to be at large.
"I suspect Trump has a pardon for him in any case"
Why would he pardon him? Assange has been so much demonized in Fox and other US media that pardoning him would be politically very stupid, even from Trump.
I think the tabloids have rotted your brain
It's very easy to accuse someone of rape, and for it to be complete lies
I'm sure the women involved were rewarded for their loyalty
But lets not lose perspective here, this is about war crimes, pure and simple
You can try to shift the focus as much as you like, you're about as convincing as "Jihadi John"
Now fuck off
It's very easy to accuse someone of rape, and for it to be complete lies
True, that's why they have investigations, and rather thorough ones at that. But scampering before anyone can ask you so you can clear your name is not exactly helping, especially if you then engage in tactics such as abusing the asylum mechanism to hide from the investigation.
I'm sure the women involved were rewarded for their loyalty
I note with interest that you do not give the women the benefit of the doubt you generously seek to extend to Assange. Assange & apologists were in the press all the time since, the women were not which is also not exactly balanced. An investigation is running against Assange, none against the women. I know logic is not exactly a strong point with those that follow St Jules™, but it's amusing how you continue to prove it.
Now fuck off
Why? Having trouble getting your tangled reasoning accepted?
The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP) is currently waiting on District Judge Leonie Brinkema deciding whether charges against Assange in the US should be declassified.
The Ecuador/UK deal is a distraction because the real threat Assange faces in the US is not the death penalty, but unjust and disproportionate prison. You don't have to like the guy to recognise that the only solution is for the UK government to promise not to extradite him to the US.
Oh, and the cat is out and being cared for by his family. It was an utterly dick move by the Ecuadoreans to falsely imply he'd mistreated it and threaten to give it away.
> You don't have to like the guy to recognise that the only solution is for the UK government to promise not to extradite him to the US.
No Country can realistically promise that when a request has not even yet been received. It's effectively putting your diplomatic relationship with another country at risk all to benefit one man, with no certainty of what the request is actually going to be.
If the US turn up and say "Him, he's a bit of a prick - give him here", then you'd feel more comfortable saying "yeah, he is. But no, can't have him from us" than if they turned up and said that some information he'd leaked had resulted in an attempt on the president's life, and he's being treated as an accessory.
Unlikely as the second one is, the point is that if you promise in advance not to extradite to the US, you run the risk of causing yourself a serious diplomatic incident because you have no idea how severe the charges are going to be in the eyes of the other state (or in fact their people).
That's why extradition requests are generally assessed on a per-case basis, and factor in the likely punishments.
Sweden couldn't possibly have issued a guarantee, and nor can the UK. It's a trope trotted out by Assange and his supporters to try and justify his position, when the reality is probably summed up this sentence in the article:
> wouldn't have guaranteed Assange's freedom outright
Unless he can walk out with a guarantee not to be arrested, much less do any time, he's going to stay put.
Senior Americans have called for Assange to be killed which alone should be enough to rule out any extradition.
Personally I feel we should not extradite anyone to the US except perhaps fleeing American criminals. I think the UK–US extradition treaty of 2003 should be rescinded. It's utterly one sided so a betrayal of British sovereignty. If I commit a crime on British soil then I should be charged in a British court and imprisoned in a British prison, not sent off to a politicised [judges should not be elected or appointed by the head of state] US court and sent to their privatised rape gulags.
Assange has not committed a crime in the US. He has said he is willing to spend time in an English prison for skipping bail, or even be extradited to Sweden, as long as he is assured he will not be extradited to the US which has a long and ongoing history of political show trials [Manning, Winner, and potentially Snowden].
I'm not an Assange fanbois, I think he disgraced Wikileaks with his attempt at election meddling, but I resent the expense of policing him in the embassy and wish a sensible UK politician or judge would guarantee no extradition to the US as a compromise out of this ridiculous stalemate. Even Soviet Hungary eventually gave József Mindszenty safe passage
Senior Americans have called for Assange to be killed
Senior Americans have called for entire nations to be killed. Phrases like 'bomb them back to the stone age' and 'turn their deserts to glass' have upon occasion been bandied around. But perhaps none of that actually matters, since for the most part you can see those selfsame senior Americans in church on a Sunday praising the Prince of Peace and turning the other cheek just as their pastor reminds them to do. Well, except for those pastors who don't.
"....Senior Americans have called for entire nations to be killed. Phrases like 'bomb them back to the stone age' and 'turn their deserts to glass' have upon occasion been bandied around. But perhaps none of that actually matters, since for the most part you can see those selfsame senior Americans in church on a Sunday praising the Prince of Peace and turning the other cheek just as their pastor reminds them to do. Well, except for those pastors who don't...."
---
Well,,,maybe it's time to give them a taste of their own medicine....if they THREATEN to kill others...then it's time to TAKE THEM SERIOUSLY and threaten them back and when appropriate, if "THEY" are a true danger to others, take them out for real !!! NEVER underestimate a threat! Hit back harder and ALWAYS TAKE THEM OUT before they take YOU out!
likely happen when they finally get sick of him and move the embassy 4 doors down the street in the middle of the night without telling Julian is that the british police will arrest him, he'll get charged with bail jumping and done for that, at which point we'll ask the swedes if they want him, if its yes , he'll be sent there post haste, if no, the US 'may' ask for him to be sent there.
In all cases , he'll fight it in the courts as far as he can, but due to jumping bail the first time , he'll be deemed a flight risk and held on remand.
Assuming neither sweden or the USA want him, he'll get deported to Australia so he can go relive old times by locking himself in his mom's basement with nothing but a mobile phone and a cat for company....
"In all cases , he'll fight it in the courts as far as he can,"
That's why he jumped bail in the UK. He'd fought it through the courts, losing at every stage and was due a final appearance which he obviously was expecting to lose as well, so he ran away from the consequences of his actions.
The arrest of Meng Wanzhou is a telling comparison. An insane US President sanctions Iran, and now gets to arrest third party nationals in Canada? Eff that for a game of soldiers!
Even Obama before him threatened to have the founders of SWIFT arrested and extradited from Belgium because SWIFT connected Iranian banks.
You're not the boss of me now
You're not the boss of me now
You're not the boss of me now
and you're not so big
The arrest of Meng Wanzhou is a telling comparison. An insane US President sanctions Iran, and now gets to arrest third party nationals in Canada? Eff that for a game of soldiers!
"The Supreme Court of British Columbia was told that Ms Meng had used a Huawei subsidiary called Skycom to evade sanctions on Iran between 2009 and 2014." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46494935
Meng Wanzhou is accused of breaking the sanctions a number of years ago, not the ones introduced by the current US president.
Hiya Imbalone,
My point was US sanctions should only apply to US citizens and US corporations and US banks. The US Government should not be able to arrest a Chinese citizen in Canada for breaking US sanctions on Iran.
Nobody elected the US President as President of the Earth.
This is over-reach. This is imperial. It is very similar to the Assange case in those terms. I am not a fan of dictatorial China, but I would not be upset if they arrested every US citizen in China on trumped up charges - if they did then what would your complaint be?
We have various international bodies, like the UN, ICC, IJC, to deal with international issues. Canada has shamed itself with this arrest.
US courts have no jurisdiction outside the US. We should stop kowtowing to them. I'm not anti-American, I just think I am the equal of any US citizen - and I am much, much better than their current politicians and judiciary.
Eff them.
"My point was US sanctions should only apply to US citizens and US corporations and US banks."
Ms Meng's organisation (a US subsidiary/associate of Huawei) is accused of buying US technology, on the express condition that it NOT be sold to Iran.... and sold it to Iran.
And they allegedly knew they were doing wrong, because, allegedly, the payment was laundered.
Meng Wanzhou is accused of breaking the sanctions a number of years ago, not the ones introduced by the current US president.
Irrelevant. She didn't commit that "offence" under the jurisdiction of the US and wasn't on US soil upon her arrest. The arrest is blatant disregard for international law and needs rectifying, otherwise there will be no state visits by some very prominent European leaders to the North American continent for quite some time.
Still irrelevant. Canada has no jurisdiction over a Chinese company. In fact, unless any US or Canadian resources were diverted through Huawei's shell company they have exactly zero grounds to detain a citizen of a foreign nation, regardless of that nation's status or involvement in a trade war with a straw-headed moron. Those sanctions only apply to subject citizens and corporate entities. Germany has flat-out told Arsenoise to go piss up a rope with them this time around. Ms Meng was just low-hanging fruit and they're relying on their "China Bad" propaganda to stop the general population thinking too much about the precedent this nonsense sets.
In Moriarty's Spin series of novels' timeline, the US is listed as a rogue nation by the UN. I think I begin to see how it got that status. If we're going to take the moral high ground, that pinnacle had better be built on solid foundations rather than a gilded turd sitting atop a load of self-interest.
Canada has a process, like many other countries, for detaining a suspect then deciding if the detention is warranted.
The process may take a day or so, but it is a process. The process will decide whether a crime has possibly been committed in Canada or if Ms Meng should be sent on her way.
Canada has a process, like many other countries, for detaining a suspect then deciding if the detention is warranted.
Indeed, it's one of those things, you are free to ignore the laws of other countries, but you've got to accept then there may be consequences to visiting them or their close allies afterwards. International sanctions rely on this, and the people who are high up in multinationals know that and what the implications are. The allegations against Ms Meng centre around using a separate company to try and hide her involvement.
Not that I think the sanctions against Iran are particularly constructive, or that reintroducing them at this time has any point beyond the theatrics of the current US president.
That's Pamela Anderson. Admittedly neither of them have aged well, hence your confusion.
I was much amused by Cryptome John Whathisname's hostility to Wikileaks initially, but that hostility quickly became pathetic and ruined the credibility of Cryptome.
You need to ask yourself, do you really think Assange could bypass the Met AND get out on London streets AND restrain himself from posting?
...he'd come out now, get nicked, get extradited, be tried for being a Russian agent, jailed and immediately pardoned by his pal in the White House. The longer he leaves it, the less likely it is that the presidential pardon will still be available.
6 years in an Embassy?
I don't have much of an opinion on Julian Assange.
However, I am curious about any financial deals related to his residency at the embassy of Ecuador.
I'd like to live in an embassy too - but without WikiLeaks to pick up the tab...
I'm considering a gofundme campaign.
This post has been deleted by its author
@FlamingDeath
It's really sad that you are so deluded that you think that all the many posts on here deriding Assange are just astroturfing.
You only need to look at the posting histories to see that this is not the case, unless you are so paranoid that you think the posting histories are a carefully maintained fiction as well?
We get it, you think the sun shines out of St Julian's arse.
Some of us, however, have a more balanced view.
There is no requirement to leave any building when any alarm sounds, although it would normally be argued it is in your safety interests. If the Embassy were to force everyone on to the streets then they are simply disguising kicking him out, so why not just kick him out.
Many buildings have "places of comparative safety", places people of limited mobility can assemble to be rescued by those with the right equipment - ever noticed the extra space on staircase landings that appears to be wasted space. The stair well is usually better protected against fire and smoke than other areas, allowing a longer escape time.
Considering he has been inside the building for 6 and a half years, he is still maintaining a good amount of vitamin D from natural sunlight it seems. Im sure he has been sneaky in and around Harrods next door for dinner. Doesnt seem the type to live on pot noodle, but i could be wrong.
He's still an Australian citizen isn't he? If the embassy want him out, why not just revoke his asylum and arrest him for trespass in the embassy? Then send him to the Australian embassy.
He's too high profile to be locked away for long - even Bradley/Chelsea Manning (who was thrown to the wolves by Wikileaks imho) has been released.
He was accused in Sweden and should have faced that head on. This on-going saga has just been stupid and costly for all involved.
If Mr Assange had done nothing more than make comments on an I.T website then he wouldn't have ended up in his current situation,which makes me suspect that this thread has magnetized a shitload of "good Germans"still feeling a bit raw at the collapse of a convenient tyranny excercised by one Mr Hitler 75 years ago,denial,the gift that just keeps "giving".I wonder what Lester would have thought eh? But then Lester was also a "doer" not merely a"sayer".Interesting that many wish to discuss the English language,rather than human rights.The up/down vote facility stimulates one of the least appealing aspects of human nature,if you don't know which one then perhaps use a mirror and have some tissue at hand or perhaps one round in a bolt gun.To the people who now administer El Reg,perhaps you could put it to the vote or,um,have a referendum...ho ho ho.
@menasco
There is a mechanism in written English where you start a new paragraph when you are making a new point. It helps the reader understand where you are going with your argument.
You may want to try it sometime, though having trudged through your post, personally I don't think it would have helped.
Danny 2,thanks for the link,very informative,just like Mr Assange's release of documents in the public interest,surely the core purpose of the internet,unless you think "opinion" trumps "facts".Elizabeth Farrelly sounds like quite a gal,"RESPECT!" as youngsters are fond of saying.
She describes herself as a previous Assange critic, I'm not sure that is true, but it seems a balanced critique.
Well, it kind of aligns with my opinion so I would consider her balanced! The SMH is a very reputable, a tad conservative, newspaper. I'm more of an The Australian type of guy. And I despise Australians.
The author claims to have been a previous Assange critic, however I don't see the article revealing any new info which may have swayed her claimed previously held opinion. Or anything which adds to the public debate for that matter.
Its just a rehash of all that has gone before including the fallacies being perpetuated surrounding the legal position of the Swedish charges, and the bizarre expectation that the Swedish authorities should have come to London to interview their suspect.
It strikes me as an opinion piece just to fill column inches. Neither here no there.
That's the thing about opinions, they can change like the wind for some people but unfailingly they are like arseholes, everyone has got one....
My guess is that he's waiting to see how Brexit plays out. A hard Brexit will mean the end of European Arrest Warrants as far as the UK is concerned. If that happens, he can leave the embassy. He'll be arrested for bail-jumping and probably serve a few days in jail, then be let free. He won't have to face the rape charges. Where-as if the UK is still part of the EU when he leaves, then during his stay in jail the warrant will be revived and he'll be off to Sweden.
Since Brexit day is only a few months away, it makes sense to wait. If Brexit is cancelled, he'll have to think again. If May's deal goes through, I've not idea what the implications are, but I suspect he's still stuffed.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
