So how are they going to get Julian Assange out of England?

[MADem]

111. Call me on what? For NOTICING a few things?

I ignore nothing--in fact, I spend a lot of time looking ALL around--not just at the obvious stuff that is waved in front of our faces, spoon fed by people who call themselves reporters.

Look at the big picture for a second. Just a quick second. Put your ideology aside and be practical.

Who benefits from Assange being stuck in the Embassy?

Ecuador does. Why? Correa wants to be the New Heir in the Square when Hugo Chavez dies. He's needs a major "coup" to do that. Tweaking the nose of UK (or appearing to) works well in that regard.

USA does. They're sick of this guy publishing their international diplomatic cables like they're National Enquirer gossip. That goes double for the countries and players named in those documents. No one likes their trashy little off-the-record remarks published for all to see. So long as he's in the Embassy, Assange isn't out there collecting more tattle-tales to publish. If he tries to run his franchise from the Embassy, the Brits will break down the door. The guy has been, in effect, MUZZLED.

Sweden does. They think he's a rapist at worst, a molester at minimum, who needs to be sentenced in Sweden and the max sentence is four years. If he sits in that Embassy for four years, hey, it's all good and they didn't have to pay to feed him, guard him, or give him dental check ups and annual physicals. It gives them an opportunity to demonstrate that they are serious about the crimes of rape and assault, which haven't always been handled, shall we say, "well" by prosecutors in that nation. The government gets a thumbs-up from Swedish women and equality-minded men who want these sort of crimes dealt with seriously.

UK does--though they, like the Ecuadorans, have to do a little work for their benefit. They are demonstrating that, even though they don't want to join the Euro Gang, that they are good neighbors to their European partners and they'll honor those international arrest warrants. No shirking on their part! No one can say they blew this one off. They also make a strong point about their sovereignty, and that usually plays well domestically.

Assange does? Well...no. All he's done is bought some time, frozen the frame, put himself in limbo. He'd better hope the world doesn't move on to some Big New Drama, as the world does--a Nahn Wun Wun or a Fukushima on steroids or a Katrina or a Haiti earthquake or an Indonesian tsunami could put him off into forgotten land, and then he'd have no bargaining power at all. The night before the announcement regarding his asylum, despite great efforts across social media, they were unable to muster even two dozen protesters and several of them were drunks wandering home after time was called. A few folks showed up after the announcement, but even they didn't hang around. The place has a few signs and a few professional protesters hanging about, but there's not "critical mass." Assange will have to make an address from a balcony or open window to stir the pot, if he can...but even that will get old, eventually. People will move on.

I ask the "Cui Bono?" question--and I look at things pragmatically. Everyone's getting what they want from this outcome, at least in the short term, and for the time being, except, perhaps Assange--unless his bucket list had "Learn conversational Spanish really, really well."

It's a win-win-win, even if briefly, for a number of the players here.

So no, I am not "wrong"--I just see things differently than you do. Your differing opinion does not trouble me, I should expect that mine shouldn't trouble you, either. It's a discussion board...the idea, here, is to discuss.