Julian Assange

Rendition to the US by Sweden is most unlikely in this case due to the publicity surrounding it, it tends to be more underhand, which is probably why JA has acted as he has and kept himself in the public eye. However Sweden does have an extradition treaty with the US and it's quite probable that this woud be implemented.

I understood that the sexual charges had already been investigated in Sweden some time ago before this all blew up and it was found there was no case to answe?

Just been reading up and yes, Sweden does have a history of cooperating in rendition. There have been several cases and these have involved mainly Eygtians seeking asylum, from the now overthrown Egyptian Governement, and torture.

Someone suggested on the radio yesterday that we should leave him in the small office in the embassy he is living in, until he comes out screaming.

Sounds ok to me.

He's a twit and has to face the music for what he did. What did he expect to gain by it all?

Exposure of corruption in the government of the "free" world is all.

Correct bags. Have you actually read some of the atrocities that were committed in our name and hushed up JO? So 'someone on the radio' (specify?) expressed an opinion. Yes, all entitled to opinions, but let's not confuse opinion with fact.

JA and his group deal in facts. I for one am sick of being lied to by our own government and other governments. But to commit atrocities, or allow allies to commit atrocities, and cover them up is not acceptable. No wonder the world is in the state it is.

Sorry for the rant but well.........

Nanadogsbody, I will not "specify". Mainly because I haven't a clue who it was. I still agree with his opinion though, whoever it was.

I don't think JA did any good whatsoever in exposing emails and such-like that were supposed to be private. In fact, I don't think he has done any good at all by any of his actions.

Like I say, he's a twit. A self seeking one.

Whatever!

One thing JA said was that Angela Merkel was basically a decent person, rather boring as regards scandal. This proves he is telling the truth.

I have always assumed that the powers that be (especially USA ones) are out to get JA because he has published information they wanted kept secret and will probably continue to do so. I also assumed the sex charges were trumped up and if he is taken to Sweden he will either end up in America (and then heaven help him) or he will meet with an unfortunate 'accident'.

Also expecting he will be presented as slimey, unsavoury, arrogant etc. in the media as part of the process of trying to ensure he loses the sympathy of the general public.

"slimy, unsavoury, arrogant"

this man? surely not!

Yeeuk!!!

He certainly looks a bit sinister in that second photo!

Just a general question for someone to inform me the facts.

I saw a news report (RUssia Today) many weeks ago and they were interviewing Wikileaks workmates and they did not really have a good word for him in the latter stages of Wikileaks workings.
Russia Today is very much a fan of Assange so it was trying to be factual rather than biased, which I think it is at times.

The impression was he had become very arrogant and becoming a celebrity character and he was enjoying that side of his life a bit too much for their liking. Does anyone know what the feelings of Wikileaks are regarding Assange? Do they back him up completely? I don't know because I personally have issues with what they do, that's my choice and I respect that others will vary.

It is simply I am interested to know.

I'm baffled JO4. Your link presented him in quite a good light I thought.

Just look at his looks! You can see how creepy he is.

See this picture on POGS's Russia Today

Look at the lips, the chin, the eyes.

The grease.

Shudder!

I think he's probably on the autistic spectrum.

With all due respect to autistic people everywhere, of course!

HOME

Well I am sorry to offend some of you but I have just watched Assange on the balcony of the Equadorian Embassy. I still think he is a narcissist, it was annoying to watch him wait for his adulation.

He was supposed to be barred from making a political speech.He obviously feels he is above keeping that promise and also the Equadorians. Both he and Equador have now widened the countries involved Russia, Bahrain, Britain, America,Sweden. He also involved all of the South American countries claiming he has their backing too. He is a devicive,dangerous man and those countries should take the time to sit back and think why he has mentioned them if they have not given their permission.

Assange is trying to devide the world by his antics, he knows only too well what he is doing. He should have gone to Sweden, faced the allegations and cleared his name. Whilst on Swedish soil he could have started this charade all over again and stayed there for months on end going through the international appeal system.

Assange is a fugitive of our laws, not a prisoner. He came to this country of his own free will, knowing he would have been dealt with fairly. By choosing Euador as his country of choice for asylum he proves the point he is a hypocrite. Equador has an appalling human rights agenda. Equador is known to give safe haven for criminals, Nazi's etc., yet he chooses this country to run to for help. Why, because he knows they hate America and he could manipulate them easily.

I struggle to understand why those who under any other circumstance would be shouting from the roof tops against a man evading a judicial trial for rape thinks he is above the law. It is not upto us to decide his guilt or not, that is upto the Swedish courts. The women involved have been disgracefully mailgned by the press and his supporters and I ruddy well feel mad about it.

Well said POGS

I, too, have just watched Assange's speech from the Ecuadorian Embassy. He made no reference whatsoever to Sweden which, after all, is the country that has sought his extradition from the UK. He made no reference at all to the charges of sexual assault, but rather tried to align himself with other people he regards as being political prisoners in the United States. He simply harangued the US and a wide variety of other countries, while heaping praise on South American countries (two of them twice) for their support of his cause (without specifying what that actually is), regardless of their human rights record.

Publishing the double speak of a powerful country is a dangerous, but valuable thing to do. Believing yourself to be an infallible super-human hero is a dangerous and daft thing to do. It is also stupid to deny easily provable facts, such as saying that he has been "abandoned" by Australia.

I think this whole business has been badly handled by the UK Government and it was a piece of wanton stupidity to mention the law, put in place after and as a result of the shooting of Yvonne Fletcher outside the Libyan Embassy (a very different situation) that contravenes the Vienna conventions. It would not be appropriate to use that law in this instance and would only play into Assange's publicity campaign.

I haven't seen it yet but I can't believe that he actually came out for a balcony moment.

Yes I can.

I was interested to hear a B.B.C Reporter talking about the cheek of the Equadorian P.M. He said he has jailed an author for writing a book about his brother and his finances. He has nationalised some T.V. stations who spoke out against him and not in so many words accused him of stifiling newspapers who are anti his government.

I rest my case, why did he choose a country that would be abhorant to his D.N.A.

It is a good job he is in Britain, had he made comments about Equador whilst on it's soil he could have been dangling from a lamp post now, not in a bed in it's embasy.

What does "abhorrent to his DNA" mean?