Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Bernard L. Madoff

UK act of of war against Ecuador?

13 posts in this topic

Disgraceful. The Israeli/US power axis just pushed the boundaries via its puppet UK and Australian governments.

Storming an embassy over not wearing a rubber and screwing two friends? International law and diplomatic immunity not count when you've openly exposed the USA and it's hegemonic ambitions and contemptuous attitudes or war crimes?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19281492

and

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/conflict-brewing-between-uk-and-ecuador-latin-american-country-agrees-grant-asylum-assange

:sadwalk::schmoll:

...and that bloody spineless cow Roxon. :fyou:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say removing the diplomatic status of an embassy for an extradition request would be an act of war since it alters the border of the foreign entity involuntarily and makes the sovereignty of that foreign entity's independent legal system void.

Edited by sydney3000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not surprised, are you? I would want to see Ecuador go to war over an invasion of their embassy. i would. go take some sth seas islands. hehe didnt they sell their carrier now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not surprised, are you? I would want to see Ecuador go to war over an invasion of their embassy. i would. go take some sth seas islands. hehe didnt they sell their carrier now?

I think you may be missing the point.

The Vienna Convention 1961

http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/9_1_1961.pdf

An attack on the embassy is, by law, without doubt akin to an attack on it's capital Quito, its Ecuadorian territory. The USA, via its vassal states of the UK, Sweden and Australia yet again has no respect for International law.

Why go to all this trouble over a low level unprotected sex allegation?

Troubling?

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/07/19/3549280.htm

More troubling?

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/documents/assange2012/Government_response.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not surprised, are you? I would want to see Ecuador go to war over an invasion of their embassy. i would. go take some sth seas islands. hehe didnt they sell their carrier now?

They only have three choices:

1. Lock down the embassy and defend it against any unwelcome entrant.

2. Imprison any parties within the British embassy in Ecuador.

3. Submit to the loss of the embassy and in return nationalise any British interest (private or public) in Ecuador.

Edited by sydney3000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They only have three choices:

1. Lock down the embassy and defend it against any unwelcome entrant.

2. Imprison any parties within the British embassy in Ecuador.

3. Submit to the loss of the embassy and in return nationalise any British interest (private or public) in Ecuador.

4. Tell their American masters to f*ck off and accept the lawful fact he has been granted asylum and allow him passage via embassy vehicle and aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ecuador needs to establish a heavy security presence outside the British Embassy. Maybe they should arrest a British diplomat on some trumped up charge (say consensual sex).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ecuador needs to establish a heavy security presence outside the British Embassy. Maybe they should arrest a British diplomat on some trumped up charge (say consensual sex).

By law, the building an vehicle is sacrosanct, the sidewalk is Britain. I don't know how they are going to get him

  1. Into the vehicle (protestors running interference?).
  2. From vehicle to aircraft.

Robertson's take:

http://www.abc.net.au/local/audio/2012/08/17/3569843.htm?site=sydney

Two years and four days ago the Swedes stated that Assange had no case to answer.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11049316

Days later (ring, ring, oh look a call from Washington) it was back on and more serious.

If Sweden is perceived as a weak lapdog what is Australia?

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1683477/Aust-could-end-Assange-stand-off-lawyer

Any google search to the ladies' previous 'ahem' organisational connections can connect the dots that he was 'set up'. How many great men have been undone because of sexual stupidity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All we need now is a car chase into the hold of a moving plane and the screenplay will be complete! I wonder who will play Assange, Tom Cruise, Matt Damon or my pick - Keifer Sutherland?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All we need now is a car chase into the hold of a moving plane and the screenplay will be complete! I wonder who will play Assange, Tom Cruise, Matt Damon or my pick - Keifer Sutherland?

No no. Keifer's too fat and old now. Philip Seymour Hoffman with a shave.

Any number of events could occur though that could save this current melodrama. Sweden could get his statement in the UK. US could deny at a senior level they had any interest in Assange. The fact that none of it is happening creates suspicion even for the conspiracy theory sceptic. But if the US were gunning for him I don't get why they wouldn't just ask the brits for extradition? Is Sweden easier? (less backlash?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any number of events could occur though that could save this current melodrama. Sweden could get his statement in the UK. US could deny at a senior level they had any interest in Assange. The fact that none of it is happening creates suspicion even for the conspiracy theory sceptic. But if the US were gunning for him I don't get why they wouldn't just ask the brits for extradition? Is Sweden easier? (less backlash?)

How does Sweden's f*cking long winters factor into it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if the US were gunning for him I don't get why they wouldn't just ask the brits for extradition? Is Sweden easier? (less backlash?)

The UK can't extradite anyone to a country if they are at risk of being tortured or executed. The US does both

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0