A Couple of Thoughts.

Here’s one that may surprise one or two of you, though it shouldn’t, given what I have written in these pages before; I do not agree that that Rsole Assange should be extradited. ‘Well, well,’ I hear you exclaiming, ‘what’s brought that on?’ Simple, really, the Swedish authorities have submitted a european arrest warrant. I have opposed this shoddy piece of bureaucrap since its introduction on the grounds that it allows for the arrest of a British Subject for an offence which may not have been committed in Britain and, moreover, which may not be an offence under British Law. There is a further complication in the fact that he is an Australian Citizen. So, here we have the case of a person who has done nothing wrong in this country, (according to Ken Clarke, that is, though I would disagree with that also,) being arrested by the police of this country,* under a Law which would seem to conflict with the law in this country, though that is a layman’s view and I stand ready to be corrected. So, when he is eventually deported to Sweden, I will not be cheering, in fact, believe it or not, I would be ready to carry a placard in a protest against his deportation – though if anyone around me started p’ ing on War memorials, I might find myself in the position of having a stern word or two.

On the other matter, in the heat of the moment?

Or, did he not know that the building he is trying, (feebly,) to set fire to is the Supreme Court?

25 thoughts on “A Couple of Thoughts.”

  1. Bravo, I tend to agree with you. Why should we deport this guy who has not committed a crime here and the evidence of a crime is rather flimsy. I read last week that he has not committed a crime in the states either. so why the fuss.
    It seems strange that we are thinking of deporting him on such weak proof yet our courts will not deport that one eyed hooked git who preaches hate outside Finsbury Park Mosque (or did) even though he is wanted for terrorism, rape and child abuse in Egypt and I think Lebanon.

    But then he hasn’t embarrassed the US gov.

  2. From the sounds of it someone may be far more likely to be able to make a fraud charge stick. It appears there is an awful lot of money unaccounted for, ie contributions to Wikileaks. It appears that no accounts ever seem to get presented for audit or exactly where the company/charity? is registered.
    As usual, follow the money, the whole thing stinks like 3 day old fish. I think they should check a few Swiss banks!

  4. Re Gilmour, defacing the flag on the Cenotaph, film of him encouraging people to attack the police and now film showing him trying to commit arson?
    And Girton hasn’t flung him out?
    What does it take these days? Murder in the streets?
    A splendid advertisement for closing most of the so called universities on a permanent basis.

  6. christinaosborne :

    From the sounds of it someone may be far more likely to be able to make a fraud charge stick. It appears there is an awful lot of money unaccounted for, ie contributions to Wikileaks. It appears that no accounts ever seem to get presented for audit or exactly where the company/charity? is registered.
    As usual, follow the money, the whole thing stinks like 3 day old fish. I think they should check a few Swiss banks!

    Reminds me a bit of the EU and Brussels with no accounts being signed of for years.

  7. bravo22c :

    I do not agree that that Rsole Assange should be extradited

    Agreed, now as for the Indian fella living in Bristol, we want him, at the risk of having Boa’s site compromised with or without Max Clifford’s publicity machine, we want that Dewani chappie back here.

  8. Whoops! I thought I had posted a reply here – disappeared into a node of infinite connection? What I thought I had written was; I think this case comes under old-style bi-lateral agreement, but I stand to be corrected.

  9. I don’t think Assange should be extradited unless it can be shown that he has a clear case to answer – and so far not one of the governments screaming for his blood have found anything to charge him with other than ‘rape’ defined so loosely that even feminist groups around the world seem to find it laughable.

    I think it is quite right that foreign governments can seek extradition orders for those who have committed crimes in their country. What I have a problem with is this daft notion that if the country in question has the death penalty criminals can claim that their ‘human rights’ will be violated if they are sent back to face charges. *!*!*

    Don’t worry Bravo, I’ll defend you if you ‘just happen’ to lose your self-control if anyone starts ‘p’ ing on War memorial’. But I hope that you will understand that that defence will be rapidly removed should you ‘just happen’ to have gone prepared to do more than simply protest. 🙂

  10. Soutie, I suspect that the Home Secretary, or the Judge hearing the request for extradition may be disinclined to oblige you, but we’ll see in due course. I would be arguing on his behalf that there is a greater likelihood of the moon being made of cheese than his receiving a fair trial under South Africa’s present regime.

  11. CWJ – would the suspicion that the accused was unlikely to get a fair trial be sufficient cause to refuse an extradition warrant? If that is the case, then Assange has no worries. Anyone who has heard US politicians baying for his blood would have to assume that the likelihood of his getting a fair trial in the US is zilch.

    It seems pretty clear to anyone who followed the Hicks’ case that he ended up pleading guilty simply to get out of Guantanamo.

  12. I think CWJ is correct in the case of both Dewani and Assange.

    Not that is necessarily taken in to account with our rather one sided arrangements with the US, unfortunately.

  13. Boa, you need to ask our Scots Legal Oracle, my learned friend in Embra for an opinion, pro bono, preferably, as I can’t afford legal fees, these days [:-)] as to whether the likelihood of the trial not being conducted impartially would be a bar to deportation. I would hope so, but I don’t know.
    In the case of Assange of course, the deportation request is from Sweden, not the USA – yet!
    I haven’t heard anything to suggest that the Swedish legal system is seriously flawed.

  14. boadicea :

    I think it is quite right that foreign governments can seek extradition orders for those who have committed crimes in their country. What I have a problem with is this daft notion that if the country in question has the death penalty criminals can claim that their ‘human rights’ will be violated if they are sent back to face charges. *!*!*

    Agreed, Boa – ‘If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.’

    boadicea :

    Don’t worry Bravo, I’ll defend you if you ‘just happen’ to lose your self-control if anyone starts ‘p’ ing on War memorial’. But I hope that you will understand that that defence will be rapidly removed should you ‘just happen’ to have gone prepared to do more than simply protest.

    One of the many useful life lessons I learned as a soldier was not to go looking for trouble – it’s quite capable of finding you on its own.

    Would your sentiments also apply to the young man in the linked article, I wonder?

  15. Bravo

    Would your sentiments also apply to the young man in the linked article, I wonder?

    I thought I’d made it pretty clear on that post that my sentiments applied to that young man. While I can understand anyone acting in the heat of the moment, I certainly don’t think that anyone who takes the wherewithal to cause damage to a demonstration (or elsewhere for that matter) and attempts to light fires can be ‘excused’ on any grounds.

  16. coldwaterjohn :

    Soutie, I suspect that the Home Secretary, or the Judge hearing the request for extradition may be disinclined to oblige you, but we’ll see in due course. I would be arguing on his behalf that there is a greater likelihood of the moon being made of cheese than his receiving a fair trial under South Africa’s present regime.

    CWJ, I disagree with you. There is a lot wrong with the legal system here but there is also a lot that is right. There are still some very capable judges and advocates. There is no jury system here. Thank God, otherwise the outcome of many trials would depend on the whims of some very unreliable people.

    Problems tend to occur when the prosecuting authority is got at by politicians or gangsters. In the case of Dewani, he would likely get a very able advocate to defend him. The prosecuting authority would still be obliged to present proof that he had committed the crime. The judge, or in the case of an appeal panel of judges, would have to be convinced that he was indeed guilty. Such cases are televised. If indeed the case against Dewani was politically motivated to protect South Africa’s tourist industry, it would seriously backfire if the verdict turned out to be unjust. Any political interference would easily be exposed and South Africa’s reputation would suffer even more. In SA it is much easier to find a guilty man innocent than an innocent many guilty, especially if the innocent man is a high profile foreigner.

  17. coldwaterjohn :

    In the case of Assange of course, the deportation request is from Sweden, not the USA – yet!
    I haven’t heard anything to suggest that the Swedish legal system is seriously flawed.

    CWJ, I am afraid I must take issue with you again. A friend of mine spent considerable time experiencing the hospitality of Sweden’s legal system. The country is by no means as clean as it would like the rest of the world to believe. Sweden was involved with extraordinary rendition.
    According to the site below, one of the females crying rape, Ms A, (Anna Ardin) has had links, albeit apparently tenuous, with the CIA.

    “Ardin has been to Cuba and while there had ties to US financed anti=-Castro groups. She worked with one group called the Ladies in White a feminist anti-Castro group. The leader of the group is reportedly connected to the CIA. She consequently wrote anti-Castro articles for a Swedish publication. The Ladies in White is partially funded by the US. government and also counts among its supporters Luis Posada Carriles a CIA agent convicted of terrorist attacks that killed hundreds of people. Of course many leftist both in Sweden and the U.S. work in CIA sponsored groups knowingly or unknowingly. They care more about their specific cause than U.S. imperial aims. After all many lefitsts support the Afghan war. I imagine liberal feminists would because they would see the war as liberating Afghan women. The left nowadays often encompasses specific issues with no broader ideology of intending to promote socialism or fight against imperialism. It may very well be that being upset with Assange’s behavior she simply decided conveniently that her feminist aims were more important than Wikileaks and the aims of that organisation. She seems to have had no compunction about making things difficult for Wikileaks by laying charges against the icon of the organization.”

    http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/7565838-who-is-anna-ardin-one-of-assanges-accusers

  18. As for British justice, how about this from Wikileaks?
    “In a diplomatic cable marked confidential, the US ambassador reported: “Without delving into the details of the case, Ellis admitted that the British police had developed the current evidence against the McCann parents, and he stressed that authorities from both countries were working co-operatively.”
    http://www.allvoices.com/s/event-7609483/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5ndWFyZGlhbi5jby51ay91ay8yMDEwL2RlYy8xMy93aWtpbGVha3MtbWFkZWxlaW5lLW1jY2Fubi1icml0aXNoLXBvbGljZQ==

  19. So why then, don’t we allow Assange to get on a plane for jolly Oz and let his home nation sort all this business out?

    Instead we are spending a fortune and getting nowhere. The Swedes either produce reasonable evidence of wrong doing or this man who is innocent until proven guilty should be allowed to go as he pleases. I do not like the idea of those raw-herring munchers telling us what we can and cannot do. The boxheads tried it twice a while back, I seem to remember it caused a bit of a ‘to do’ in the earlier part of the 20th century. Oop yours Gunnar!

  20. Ferret –

    Leak-wise, he has broken no Australian law.
    Rape-wise, he may have broken the law of his home state (Queensland), but there appears to be no evidence available at present, nor have any charges been brought. Quite how a EAW has been raised, I do not comprehend, nor do I understand why he’s banged up.

    I’m sure he’d be quite content to be returned to Australia.

  21. Like I said Bearsy,

    Our legal system has no interest in him, he has not broken any of our laws. The herring munchers say he is a wrong’un but cannot provide any credible evidence of such. It may come as a surprise to you, lordy knows how, to learn that I am no defender of the EUSSR. They had a chance to arrest him when he was there, they didn’t tough gravlax Gunnar.

Add your Comment