Ecuador says UK threatens to raid embassy over Assange

QUITO (Reuters) - Ecuador said on Wednesday the British government had threatened to raid its embassy in London if WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is not handed over, and that Quito would make its decision on his asylum request on Thursday.
"Today we've received a threat by the United Kingdom, a clear and written threat that they could storm our embassy in London if Ecuador refuses to hand in Julian Assange," Ecuadorean Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino told reporters.
"We are not a British colony," he added in an angry statement after a meeting with President Rafael Correa.
Ecuador will announce its decision regarding Assange's asylum request on Thursday at 7 a.m. (1200 GMT), he added, amid media speculation that the government has already decided to grant Assange asylum.
Former computer hacker Assange, who enraged Washington in 2010 when his WikiLeaks website published secret U.S. diplomatic cables, is wanted in Sweden to face trial for rape.
Assange has been taking refuge in the Ecuadorean embassy in London since June 19. The Australian anti-secrecy campaigner says he fears he could be bundled to the United States where his life would be at risk.
Even if Ecuador gives him asylum, it is difficult to see how the WikiLeaks boss could physically leave the closely watched embassy and head to an airport without being arrested by British police.

http://news.yahoo.com/ecuador-says-britain-threatened-raid-embassy-over-assange-...

<<We've outsourced foreign policy to the US. >>
..................................................................

The Goerge W Bush spiel is well entrenched in the heads of our governments.

"If you're not with us, you're against us"

He's put fear into the Australian parliament. I'm surprised they can make any decisions without the US sanctioning it first.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Aug 16^th, 2012 at 11:23am:



Isn't it strange how the Pommies have become exactly the
same sort of people they fought against in WW2?

"The UK remains determined to fulfil its obligation to extradite Mr Assange in accordance with the ruling of the High Court.

Throughout this process have we have drawn the Ecuadorians' attention to relevant provisions of our law, whether, for example, the extensive human rights safeguards in our extradition procedures, or to the legal status of diplomatic premises in the UK"

British Foreign Office Statement, Aug 15, 2012.


"You need to be aware that there is a legal base in the UK, the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987, that would allow us to take actions in order to arrest Mr Assange in the current premises of the embassy.
We sincerely hope that we do not reach that point, but if you are not capable of resolving this matter of Mr Assange's presence in your premises, this is an open option for us.
We need to reiterate that we consider the continued use of the diplomatic premises in this way incompatible with the Vienna Convention and unsustainable and we have made clear the serious implications that this has for our diplomatic relations."

Letter from the British Government to President of Ecuador, Aug 15, 2012.

Delivered by UK Ambassador, Quito.


         

You can't run Assange....

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/alburyj

Some guy filming outside the embassy

SOB

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 16^th, 2012 at 11:56am:


Fair? You know what those charges are? They are pretty obviously made up so the yanks can get their hands on him.

SOB

I remember the cartoon of a woman in a bank, and the teller comes up and tells her he is sorry, but the cheque she has presented has bounced. She cries out, "Oh no, I've been raped."

The Assange case looks as dodgy as all hell, where a willing, consensual sexual partner, can have a change of heart about a guy and then claim their sexual activities should retrospectively be considered as not consensual, because her opinion of him has changed, it is a patently absurd argument, and unless you are talking about some bizarre and devious form of mind control, that goes beyond the basic flattery that most women fall for, then it should be rejected completely as a valid complaint.

I fear for the safety of Julian Assange if the US get their hands on him, and the probability that this whole sordid drama is not a simple case about women's rights seems pretty bloody clear.