Ecuador offered to send Assange to Sweden:

[Are_grits_groceries]

Ecuador says it offered to send Julian Assange to Sweden, as long as Sweden wouldn't then extradite him to the US, but no deal.

http://twitter.com/AnnCurry/statuses/236093785535299584

Hmmmmmmmmmm......

[riverbendviewgal]

1. AHA ...now we know the plans for Assange

seems that his final destination is to go to the USA..

[hifiguy]

34. The US would merely be a way station.

Assange would be immediately held in "protective custody" and promptly disappeared to Gitmo or someplace like Kazakhstan or to wherever it was Darth Cheney was farming out his torture. Or he might "commit suicide" in his jail cell. Accidents happen all the time.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

2. I hope the DUers that had doubts about this now reevaluate the situation.

[msanthrope]

3. Have we asked to extradite Mr. Assange? No?

Then Sweden is right to not grant a conditional 'No' on a hypothetical.

[Are_grits_groceries]

4. How do you know what we have asked? nt

[msanthrope]

7. It's a little thing called a court. You have to make an application

to a court for an extradition order. If we haven't done it in either a Swedish, or a UK court, then no extradition request is ongoing. I mean, if we really wanted him, wouldn't we just get him? We do have the CIA, you know.

Now, I have a question for you....

Here are the actual charges that Mr. Assange faces.

1.
On 13th – 14th August 2010, in the home of the injured party [name given] in Stockholm, Assange, by using violence, forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party’s arms and a forceful spreading of her legs whilst lying on top of her and with his body weight preventing her from moving or shifting.
2.
On 13th – 14th August 2010, in the home of the injured party [name given] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity. Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge.
3.
On 18th August 2010 or on any of the days before or after that date, in the home of the injured party [name given] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity i.e. lying next to her and pressing his naked, erect penis to her body.
4.
On 17th August 2010, in the home of the injured party [name given] in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state.
It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party’s sexual integrity.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110224-Britain-Ruling-Assange-Extradition-to-Sweden.pdf

Want to tell me which act Julian Assange should not have to answer for?

[ljm2002]

12. Those are the *allegations* that he faces...

...they are not *charges*, since he has NOT been charged with anything to date.

Furthermore, the women in question behaved in ways that would tend to undermine their credibility and the seriousness of their claims. Namely: one of them was palling around with Assange for two days following his alleged bad behavior, bragging about her association with him -- which does not seem to be the behavior of an aggrieved rape victim. One of them left Sweden for Israel. One of them has known ties to the CIA. Neither of them actually wanted to press rape charges in the first place.

You can bring up all the salacious details of the *allegations* that you like. That, in fact, is the point of a trumped-up sex charge, to smear the person in question and make decent people feel revolted when they see the *alleged* details.

However, for all of us decent people who feel revolted when reading the above, it is good to remember: none of this has been adjudicated. The initial investigation of this case resulted in the charges being dropped; it was only later that they were reinstated. Also, one of the players in this case on the prosecution side has links to Karl Rove, of all people. Also, at the time Assange left Sweden, he was in fact free to do so. In other cases of this sort, authorities typically are willing to question the person outside of the country if that is where they are. It is not that far from Sweden to the UK.

Do you seriously think that, if these exact same accusations were made against someone else who is not Julian Assange, there would be an international incident over it? Puhleeze, get real.

[msanthrope]

13. Yes. And he will face them in Sweden, where he can raise the defenses

you suggested.

Just as anyone accused of such things should have to. Assange doesn't get a pass.

[ljm2002]

20. "Just as anyone accused of such things..."

"...should have to."

I get that some people think this is just a case of needing to face the music and appear for questioning. I freely admit that I do not know the truth, or not, of these allegations. Only he and the women involved actually know, as is so often true in sexual cases like this. I also freely admit he may be a cad in his personal life, or even beyond a cad.

None of this alters the fact that he is a high-profile target who has been targeted by the U.S. There are ample quotes from high ranking U.S. officials, including Diane Feinstein who holds a high rank on the Senate Intelligence Committee, as well as our own VP Joe Biden, which make it clear that people in power would like to see him brought to some sort of "justice" for his "crimes" of revealing embarrassing information about our military and our diplomats.

If he were not Julian Assange, one of two things would have happened to this case: 1 - once he left the country, the Swedish system would have dropped pursuit; or 2 - they would have questioned him in the U.K., as they have for many other people and as Assange had agreed to do.

The fact that Assange agreed to be questioned in the U.K. rather puts the lie to him trying to "get a pass" on this. Why do you think the Swedish authorities refused his offer? It seems curious to me.

[morningfog]

14. Sweden can question him at Ecuador Embassy.

[msanthrope]

16. No. That's not how it works.

When you jump bail, you are a fugitive, and don't get to call the shots.

[morningfog]

19. He hasn't been charged.

If they really want to talk to him, they can go talk to him. If they think they have a case, they can charge him now.

[msanthrope]

22. They don't have to charge him. They have a valid warrant.

And look, not for anything, but no jurisdiction is going to dance to the tune of a bail-jumper. Doesn't happen.

[morningfog]

28. How many people have had international arrest warrants issued against them

solely for questioning on sexual assault accusations?

Assange has a valid reason to fear that once in custody anywhere, he will never be free again. It has nothing to do with the accusations, which aren't even formal charges, and everyone know it.

[ljm2002]

21. He didn't jump bail. n/t

[msanthrope]

23. Really? It was in all the papers. His bail money is being forfeited. nt

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jun/20/julian-assange-supporters-240000-bail?

[ljm2002]

27. I assumed you were referring to when he left Sweden...

...two years ago, not to his seeking asylum now.

We were discussing the accusationss leveled in Sweden, weren't we?

[HooptieWagon]

8. Officially? No. That would expose US involvement.

But just b/c US hasn't asked officially for extradition doesn't mean they haven't made back door requests for Sweden and UK to grab Assange and turn him over to US agents.

[msanthrope]

9. We have the CIA! We don't need to make 'backdoor requests.'

I mean, Assange has been living in a mansion for two years. You think we needed permission to go after him?

[HooptieWagon]

10. There would be a lot of international outcry and splainin to do

if the CIA kidnapped or killed a foreign national, on foreign soil. However, if he was detained by foreign police, he might just sort of "disappear".

[msanthrope]

11. He was detained by foreign police, and nothing happened to him!

Did you miss his 2-year jaunt through the court system?

If we wanted Assange harmed, don't you think we would have done so?

Right now, Julian's own hubris is doing the job just fine.

Any comment on the sexual offences I posted? Tell me, which ones does he not have to answer for?

[morningfog]

29. CCR Condemns Reported Sealed Indictment Against WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange

February 28, 2012, New York – Leaks published today from Stratfor, a private intelligence corporation, indicate the United States Department of Justice has issued a secret, sealed indictment against Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks.

http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/ccr-condemns-reported-sealed-indictment-against-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange

[msanthrope]

30. And? Any proof that a second-hand email boast is true? nt

[morningfog]

31. The behavior of all interested parties certainly supports it.

[joelz]

5. I think its pretty clear what is going on here

the Brits really don't have much skin in the game so why threaten to storm the embassy what super power could be pressuring them to break all diplomatic rules Ecuador has stated the reasons immunity was granted very believable

[HooptieWagon]

6. Yep. Its rather evident Sweden and UK are US puppets.

The extradition is merely for "questioning". If that was so, Sweden could merely ask to have a police investigator question Assange at the embassy.

[randome]

15. Why would Sweden promise to protect someone who isn't their citizen from the rest of the world?

It's ludicrous for Assange to think he can command nations to do his bidding.

[ananda]

17. It's not ludicrous at all.

There would be no real justice for Assange.
The USA wants him to disappear.

[randome]

24. Why?

I have yet to hear of how the world has changed because of Assange. What have been the consequences of his document dump? Red faces in the bowels of the security apparatus? Oh my God, Assange revealed that diplomats are not always honest! TAKE HIM DOWN!

He is not the world destroyer/savior some want him to be.

[cpwm17]

33. The Arab Spring started in Tunisia, partly due to info from Wikileaks

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-01-18/opinion/tunisia.wikileaks_1_tunisians-wikileaks-regime?_s=PM:OPINION

This is one example.

[backscatter712]

25. They've done so before.

Under other circumstances, they've refused to extradite suspects to countries with the death penalty, such as the U.S.

So you'd think that would be an easy promise for Sweden to make.

But for the case of Assange, they strangely refused to make that promise.

Something stinks to high heaven. Equador was absolutely right in granting asylum to Assange. Between the cops threatening to storm a foreign embassy, (as opposed to how the UK treated Pinochet) and Sweden's refusal to grant what they always grant in other cases, I'm absolutely convinced that the "date rape" is nothing but a cover for what they really want to do. They want to drag Assange to the U.S., or maybe to Gitmo, supermax him until he commits suicide, maybe execute him because he pissed off powerful people.

And you're continuing to spew the party line after they exposed their true intentions. But by all means, continue to broadcast your lies and propaganda, randome. You provide endless entertainment to the rest of us!

[randome]

26. The difference between us is that I'm not angry at YOUR entertainment value.

That and I'm willing to be convinced that I'm wrong.

[Marrah_G]

18. I'm pretty sure it's the US that wants him

and he will end up here being prosecuted by the same group we can't get to prosecute anyone one wall street.

[qb]

32. Thank you Ecuador, for taking a stand against injustice.