UK on the verge of committing an act of war...

Page 1 of 6 [ 83 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

PM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Oct 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,466
Location: Southeastern United States

15 Aug 2012, 9:10 pm

...by storming the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.

If anyone has been watching the Wikileaks Facebook page or Twitter feed in the last hour, you know what this is about. The UK government is seeking to take Julian Assange into custody for "sex crimes" committed in Sweden.

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politi ... 249pe.html

https://twitter.com/wikileaks


_________________
Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?


Last edited by PM on 15 Aug 2012, 10:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

15 Aug 2012, 10:07 pm

Disgusting. They wouldn't be threatening to storm an embassy for just some nobody that was accused of those crimes.



xenon13
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,638

16 Aug 2012, 9:54 am

Ecuador granted him asylum. This blackmail made it impossible for it to do otherwise I think particularly after Ecuador publicised it.



Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

16 Aug 2012, 9:58 am

So he's now an Ecuadorian citizen? Blimey, he'll have a decent book to write in his old age.



Shatbat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2012
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,791
Location: Where two great rivers meet

16 Aug 2012, 10:38 am

This will certainly have repercussions. I'll be keeping close attention to the development of this situation.


_________________
To build may have to be the slow and laborious task of years. To destroy can be the thoughtless act of a single day. - Winston Churchill


Khandov
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 23 Jul 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 33
Location: Europe

16 Aug 2012, 11:04 am

As irrational as it may be. That may make him a martyr of free Internet and further enlarge the chasm between politicians and people.



Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

16 Aug 2012, 11:04 am

Tequila wrote:
So he's now an Ecuadorian citizen? Blimey, he'll have a decent book to write in his old age.


asylum and citizenship has nothing to do with eachother,

i cuold as a dane seek asylum in any embassy from any country, that is if they are on sovereign soil, something fewer and fewer embassies are


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

16 Aug 2012, 1:38 pm

No embassy--not one single one of them--is on sovereign soil. Every embassy is the territory of the receiving State, in this case the United Kingdom. Embassies and the official residences of heads of mission are granted immunity, but that is an action by legislation of the receiving State, which is legally free to repeal that legislation, or suspend its application at any time.

Now, there are certainly consequences for that. But let's remember who violated the Vienna Convention first:

The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 wrote:
Article 41

1.Without prejudice to their privileges and immunities, it is the duty of all persons enjoying such privileges and immunities to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving State. They also have a duty not to interfere in the internal affairs of that State.
...
3.The premises of the mission must not be used in any manner incompatible with the functions of the mission as laid down in the present Convention or by other rules of general international law or by any special agreements in force between the sending and the receiving State.


The execution of Sweden's request for extradition is an internal affair of the United Kingdom. The matter was adjudicated before the courts of England and Wales, and Mr. Assange attorned himself to the jurisdiction of those courts. Only when he lost did he seek to evade jurisdiction.

Nowhere in the Convention nor in customary international law is it provided that a diplomatic mission may be used as a means to harbour an individual who is seeking to evade the authorities of the receiving State. Ecuador is interposing itself between the Courts of England and Wales and an individual who is under the jurisdiction of those courts. It is an intolerable abuse of diplomatic immunity that is in now way saved by Mr. Assange's other actions.


_________________
--James


edgewaters
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,427
Location: Ontario

16 Aug 2012, 1:55 pm

There is certainly nothing new about embassies taking in fugitives or refugees from the host country. Britain itself has done so, on numerous occasions.



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

16 Aug 2012, 2:07 pm

edgewaters wrote:
There is certainly nothing new about embassies taking in fugitives or refugees from the host country. Britain itself has done so, on numerous occasions.


Name two.

John William tried to take refuge in the British Embassy in 1726, but he was arrested by the Spanish authorities, within the Embassy. I can find no other record of a person seeking refuge in a British Embassy in the last 286 years.


_________________
--James


edgewaters
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,427
Location: Ontario

16 Aug 2012, 2:32 pm

visagrunt wrote:
edgewaters wrote:
There is certainly nothing new about embassies taking in fugitives or refugees from the host country. Britain itself has done so, on numerous occasions.


Name two.

John William tried to take refuge in the British Embassy in 1726, but he was arrested by the Spanish authorities, within the Embassy. I can find no other record of a person seeking refuge in a British Embassy in the last 286 years.


You must have got that off this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pe ... ic_mission

It is only a list of notable individuals, not a comprehensive list.

It is quite easy to name a second: Vasil Mitrokhin, for example.



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

16 Aug 2012, 2:55 pm

edgewaters wrote:
You must have got that off this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pe ... ic_mission

It is only a list of notable individuals, not a comprehensive list.

It is quite easy to name a second: Vasil Mitrokhin, for example.


My first sources were Denza's Diplomatic Law and some monographs from my days in Canada's foreign service. Indeed, until I did a google search, I didn't even know about William and I assumed that Britain had never harboured an individual against the authorities of a receiving State.

There are important differences between Mistrokhin and Assange.

First, Mistrokhin was not harboured at the British Embassy in Riga. He had a house and, were the Latvians so inclined, they could have exercised jurisdiction over him at any time.

Second, no one--including the Russians--was seeking to arrest, detain or otherwise impede Mistrokhin.

So again, name two. Any other attempt by a British mission to keep an individual out of the hands of local authorities, recognized as lawful authorities by the United Kingdom, who were seeking that individual.


_________________
--James


visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

16 Aug 2012, 3:49 pm

Further research has turned up a possibility that will bear further scrutiny.

In 1984, six individuals sought refuge in the British Consulate in Durban. I have only found one journal article that covers the case, and it is not clear whether the British authorities simply stood passively by until the six left (having been refused asylum by any other country), or whether they took any active steps to shelter them.

It's a possible case of a British attempt to confer extraterritorial asylum, but I suspect that the British officials were passive.


_________________
--James


JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

16 Aug 2012, 3:52 pm

visagrunt wrote:
Further research has turned up a possibility that will bear further scrutiny.

In 1984, six individuals sought refuge in the British Consulate in Durban. I have only found one journal article that covers the case, and it is not clear whether the British authorities simply stood passively by until the six left (having been refused asylum by any other country), or whether they took any active steps to shelter them.

It's a possible case of a British attempt to confer extraterritorial asylum, but I suspect that the British officials were passive.


This is why you are my freaking hero.
Dumb folks try to win arguments.
clever ones try to find the truth.


_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/


Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

16 Aug 2012, 4:10 pm

It is only a matter of time before the US just kills Assange outright. All the better for them if he's in Ecuador, they won't have to worry about offending any nations they are really friendly with, with action on their soil. Neither the US or UK have a history of great respect towards other nations' sovereignty.


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


PM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Oct 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,466
Location: Southeastern United States

16 Aug 2012, 4:15 pm

Vigilans wrote:
It is only a matter of time before the US just kills Assange outright. All the better for them if he's in Ecuador, they won't have to worry about offending any nations they are really friendly with, with action on their soil. Neither the US or UK have a history of great respect towards other nations' sovereignty.


Killing the frontman will not cripple an organization, but it is likely to cause international riots and Anonymous will likely go insane all over the US cyber infrastructure if that happens.


_________________
Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?