Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

muriel_volestrangler

(106,476 posts)
23. The 'rendition' you refer to was done clandestinely
Wed Aug 22, 2012, 09:49 AM
Aug 2012

to people no-one had heard of (and the UK has not been innocent in that regard either). It would indeed have to be Obama "disappearing" Assange. Assange is in the public eye; whatever happens will have to go through a visible public process. And that's easier from the UK than Sweden:

Legal myths about the Assange extradition

Two: “Assange is more likely to be extradited to USA from Sweden than the United Kingdom”

This is similarly untrue. Any extradition from Sweden to the United States would actually be more difficult. This is because it would require the consent of both Sweden and the United Kingdom.

(See Francis FitzGibbon QC’s Nothing Like the Sun for further detail on this.)

One can add that there is no evidence whatsoever that the United Kingdom would not swiftly comply with any extradition request from the United States; quite the reverse. Ask Gary McKinnon, or Richard O'Dwyer, or the NatWest Three.

In reality, the best opportunity for the United States for Assange to be extradited is whilst he is in the United Kingdom.

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2012/08/legal-myths-about-assange-extradition


If he fears that the Swedish prosecutor is merely a cat’s paw for the US government, who will demand his extradition when he arrives in Sweden, he has to take account of Section 58 of our Extradition Act 2003: if the Swedes want to extradite him to the USA, they have to obtain the consent of the British Home Secretary first. That rule derives from Article 28 of the 2002 EU Council Framework Decision (2002/584/JHA), which binds the Swedish government. After the investigation and any criminal proceedings in Sweden end, that restriction also ends and the Swedes can extradite him without reference to the UK government. But neither Sweden and the UK will extradite anyone to a country where the accused is in peril of the death sentence if convicted of an offence, or where prison conditions are so bad as to breach his rights under Article 3 of the ECHR (‘No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’).

http://ffgqc.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/julian-the-asylum-seeker/

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Are you and Struggle4Progress in some kind of a competition? randome Aug 2012 #1
So... I'll Put You Down For Theory 3 ??? WillyT Aug 2012 #2
Until you show evidence that there's an overt conspiracy to bring Assange to the US... brooklynite Aug 2012 #3
Assange haters (the ones who are not trolls) mostly fall into two groups whatchamacallit Aug 2012 #4
Please tell us the criteria you utilize to label your fellow DUers. randome Aug 2012 #6
Since Obama left Assange unmolested in Britain for two years hack89 Aug 2012 #10
It's easier for the US to rendition people from Sweden than to extradite from the UK. limpyhobbler Aug 2012 #12
Really? Obama would be that stupid? hack89 Aug 2012 #13
You Tell Me... He Apparently Has No Sway Over The SEC... WillyT Aug 2012 #15
You will have to decode your question. nt hack89 Aug 2012 #16
That Would Be... Headless Nails... WillyT Aug 2012 #17
So why did the FBI, CIA, NSA, MIC let Assange go unmolested in Britain for two years? hack89 Aug 2012 #22
He's alive because they want to make an example of him. nt TBF Aug 2012 #26
By putting on a show trial where he has a good chance of being acquitted? hack89 Aug 2012 #29
Um... WillyT Aug 2012 #30
You notice not a single American cable is mentioned? Why is that? hack89 Aug 2012 #31
Well... WillyT Aug 2012 #32
So nothing indicating that the US has an actual law he broke? hack89 Aug 2012 #33
Sorry I should have wrote more clearly limpyhobbler Aug 2012 #19
The UK has a history of rendition themselves so I am not so sure of that. nt hack89 Aug 2012 #21
The 'rendition' you refer to was done clandestinely muriel_volestrangler Aug 2012 #23
No it isn't. What horseshit. MADem Aug 2012 #24
Y'know, it is possible to support Assange and Obama at the same time. backscatter712 Aug 2012 #14
you noticed that too quinnox Aug 2012 #25
How much is the divide really? limpyhobbler Aug 2012 #5
Well... Not Quite A Poll, But... WillyT Aug 2012 #7
Yep, came out pretty heavily pro-Assange.. n/t Fumesucker Aug 2012 #8
Better you than me.. Fumesucker Aug 2012 #9
Shhh... WillyT Aug 2012 #11
"You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment." Poll_Blind Aug 2012 #18
Gawd Was That A Great Series! HangOnKids Aug 2012 #28
It's always interesting to see woo me with science Aug 2012 #20
Excellent. TBF Aug 2012 #27
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Ya Know... There's A Thir...»Reply #23