General Discussion

hack89

(39,181 posts)

33. We are talking about the Swedish government

Thu Feb 6, 2014, 06:24 AM

Feb 2014

What makes you so sure they are willing to break their own laws in such a public manner? What makes you so sure the Swedish public would not punish their government for breaking their own laws? What makes you so sure the Swedish legal system would let their own government break the law? The are a true democracy with one of the most fair and independent judiciary's in the world - that is why I know that rendition is merely an excuse on Assange's part to avoid arrest.

As for the American government, the status quo suits them. Assange is out of the way and impotent. The American people don't care about Assange. He can be safely ignored. Eventually he will come out the embassy and be arrested - either a medical emergency that requires a trip to the hospital or a change in the Ecuadorian government. There is no need to give Assange any assurances - he is a fugitive from justice that deserves no special considerations.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

70 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

‘Assange won’t come’: Swedish MPs urge end to whistleblower case [View all] Pharaoh Feb 2014 OP

Seems like good advice. iemitsu Feb 2014 #1

Agree...What is the Purpose...it's just to Jail Him...without Interview about the Charges! KoKo Feb 2014 #15

No one confines St Julian to the embassy: he went there voluntarily, jumping bail in the process, struggle4progress Feb 2014 #21

Did you know he has been texting with one of the women who has told him sabrina 1 Feb 2014 #26

Unfortunately, sabrina, in my experience, you are an extraordinarily unreliable source: much of struggle4progress Feb 2014 #31

Unfortunately if you came here to learn, you made very little attempt to sabrina 1 Feb 2014 #32

Well said... SidDithers Feb 2014 #42

"St Julian" Cha Feb 2014 #28

Ecuador should just find better digs...maybe they can find something MADem Feb 2014 #29

Well you don't have a bias. "St Julian"? Matariki Feb 2014 #43

Do feel free to provide your own attempt at unbiased fact-based discussion struggle4progress Feb 2014 #44

He can walk out whenever he wants to hack89 Feb 2014 #36

Yup. What most of the world has been saying for a couple years now riderinthestorm Feb 2014 #2

What's the point in that? reusrename Feb 2014 #3

The point is that the interview with Assange will allow the prosecutor to determine Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #4

They have already said they will indict him hack89 Feb 2014 #5

Retired Swedish district prosecutor Rolf Hillegren begs to differ: reorg Feb 2014 #64

The unretired prosecutors appear to disagree with him hack89 Feb 2014 #70

Sure, but that's never been the question, has it? reusrename Feb 2014 #6

Sure - if Assange promises to surrender if they decide to indict him. hack89 Feb 2014 #7

Actually, I think he already has agreed to that, if they promise not to rendition him. reusrename Feb 2014 #8

The Swedes can't promise that hack89 Feb 2014 #9

I don't know if a judge in Sweden has the power to rendition him or not. reusrename Feb 2014 #10

No he will not be renditioned hack89 Feb 2014 #11

The magistrates in the UK wrestled with this question for quite a while, before folding. reusrename Feb 2014 #12

You have confused extradition with rendition hack89 Feb 2014 #13

It is delusional to think that I am confused. reusrename Feb 2014 #14

"Behind closed doors" ie in secrecy hack89 Feb 2014 #16

I'm sort of losing the thread of your argument here. reusrename Feb 2014 #17

We are talking about the Swedish government hack89 Feb 2014 #33

What makes me so sure is a very simple and obvious fact. reusrename Feb 2014 #38

But it suits the US better to have Assange where he is hack89 Feb 2014 #41

No. Assange's lawyers could have made that forward-rendition argument in the UK courts but struggle4progress Feb 2014 #20

Neither Assange nor his lawyers are signatories to the UN Charter. reusrename Feb 2014 #22

You obviously don't know what "non-refoulement" means struggle4progress Feb 2014 #24

Let me guess. reusrename Feb 2014 #25

St Julian has already said repeatedly that he won't leave the Sanctuary of Blessed Ecuador struggle4progress Feb 2014 #18

It isn't just a sweeping theory. It seems to be reality. reusrename Feb 2014 #23

It is clear you have not bothered to study the available documents. struggle4progress Feb 2014 #27

Look, I think that I understand your perspective, I just disagree. reusrename Feb 2014 #37

I merely urged you to review the actual court documents in the Assange extradition case, before struggle4progress Feb 2014 #40

Crude mind fucking bullshit? reusrename Feb 2014 #45

Well, it certainly doesn't seem to be helping you think clearly struggle4progress Feb 2014 #46

Lerp! reusrename Feb 2014 #47

"No one who disagrees with me has any character, honesty, or seriousness" struggle4progress Feb 2014 #53

"The Swedes are in bed with the CIA"... Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #52

It isn't all that complicated. reusrename Feb 2014 #55

Ignoring the obvious Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #58

It's a political question. reusrename Feb 2014 #61

So why Sweden? Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #65

Ya got me. reusrename Feb 2014 #66

thank you for your Cha Feb 2014 #30

Given that Europe's willing accomplices obeyed the US request MannyGoldstein Feb 2014 #35

Paranoid hallucinations don't improve our understanding of the world struggle4progress Feb 2014 #39

Denied *overflight* into France, Spain, Italy, and Portugal MannyGoldstein Feb 2014 #48

1. Stated reason for landing: faulty fuel gauge struggle4progress Feb 2014 #49

They ran out of gas! reusrename Feb 2014 #57

I provided several links: it's not my fault if you refuse to read struggle4progress Feb 2014 #62

It's not my problem that you don't understand how planes fly. reusrename Feb 2014 #63

Here's the simplest explanation, requiring no paranoid hallucinations: struggle4progress Feb 2014 #67

Would you please stop with the lie about claims of a faulty fuel gauge. reusrename Feb 2014 #68

Anyone interested, in what I actually wrote, should read my posts struggle4progress Feb 2014 #69

2. Denial of refueling at Lisbon: struggle4progress Feb 2014 #50

3. Spanish apology: struggle4progress Feb 2014 #51

So after the plane landed, Portugal and Spain said it was a misunderstanding, France MannyGoldstein Feb 2014 #54

Portugal and Spain's "apologies" were "we regret any misunderstanding/inconvenience but struggle4progress Feb 2014 #56

France admitted a delay in allowing the airspace request, but it may make sense struggle4progress Feb 2014 #59

Austria denied attempting to board the plane struggle4progress Feb 2014 #60

Not this again Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #19

Right... Lost_Count Feb 2014 #34