UK Authorities Threaten To Storm Ecuadorian Embassy To Arrest Julian Assange

paulmac84 writes "According to the BBC, the UK have issued a threat to storm the Ecuadorian Embassy to arrest Julian Assange. Under the terms of the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987 the UK has the right to revoke the diplomatic immunity of any embassy on UK soil. Ecuador are due to announce their decision on Assange's asylum request on Thursday morning."

Comments

Yeah

[Anonymous Coward]

Because they are really bothered about that possible rape charge against him.

Re:Yeah

[JaredOfEuropa]

It's not even really rape; note that his so called crime only carries a crappy fine as punishment. Oh, and he isn't being charged either. The police just want to ask him some questions; something they normally do over the phone in cases like this, or perhaps send over some officers to the UK for an interview. Nothing that warrants the Interpol warrant (which was issued against the rules), and certainly nothing worth storming an embassy for.

Re:Yeah

[sgt_doom]

And they want him back in Gothenburg (Goteborg), not Stockholm, very, very odd --- oh yeah, that's where "Extreme Rendition Airlines" a k a, Jeppesen Systems AB is located!

Re:Yeah

[INowRegretThesePosts]

Because they are really bothered about that possible rape charge against him.

Why would they _not_ be worried about such a charge?
And why would they _not_ be worried about the embassy being used to circumvent the law?

Re:Yeah

[hobarrera]

They're not circumventing the law; the Ecuadorian embassy is subject to Ecuadorian law, not UK law.

Re:Yeah

[Rei]

It's not even really rape; note that his so called crime only carries a crappy fine as punishment. Oh, and he isn't being charged either.

Are you going for a new record in "how dense can I pack errors about the assange case"?

1) The checkbox on the arrest warrant for "rape" was marked, and the UK courts found that the charges would be rape even under UK law (most notably, having sex with a person who's asleep, even ignoring that he did so without a condom which had been made clear was a precondition of sex with her - it's *always* illegal)
2) The charges are with penalties of up to four years in prison.
3) He cannot be charged in absentia under Swedish law. There is a series of steps which must be taken in order to lead to formal charges, and not all of them have been taken yet. Hence the warrant to continue the process. The European Arrest Warrant makes it clear that he is to be returned with intent to charge. Which also means it makes no sense to send over Swedish interrogators to the UK - not like anyone should have to give famous people special treatment anyway just because they say to.

Re:Yeah

[meerling]

Close and embassy and storming one are two very different things.

In closing an embassy, you're doing the diplomatic version of saying, "Hey, we don't like the way you're acting, get off my lawn".

Storming an embassy involves sending and armed attack force into another countries sovereign territory.

If you didn't know, closing an embassy is something that happens now and then, but storming an embassy is tantamount to a military invasion and can start a war. Sure, there's no way Ecuador is going to get into a war with the U.K., but they can still cause a buttload of trouble in the U.N. if the U.K. does it.

Re:Yeah

[qbitslayer]

You must be a US agent. The Ecuadorean embassy is not interfering with the legal system of the UK. They have the right under international law to determine whether or not someone who takes refuge on their sovereign soil (yes, the embassy is their soil) is a criminal or is running away from political persecution. Only a fool or a liar would deny that Assange is a political refugee.

Re:Yeah

[JaredOfEuropa]

Ah yes, re point 1, one of the "rape victims" alledgedly made Assange a nice breakfast after this so called rape took place, rather odd behavior after having been violated. As it turned out, both victims pressed charges only after finding out that Assange had been double dipping, after conferring with each other and then seeking legal council about their options. At the risk of sounding sexist and dismissing more sinister tin foil theories, I say the most palatable theory about this matter is that it is all about "a woman scorned", or two in this case.

But let's suppose that something unconsentual has taken place here. If Assange is extradited to Sweden, charged and convicted for rape or whatever, and if it ends there, then I will publicly come out here and eat my words. But if he is extradited, fined or sentenced to do a little time, and then released to the custody of the US, by secret rendition or simple and legal extradition, then all you'll get is a fat "told you so"

Re:Yeah

[INowRegretThesePosts]

The reason they would not be worried is because there have been no charges filed against Assange. The rational they used was that he is wanted for "questioning" about the situation.

In the Swedish legal system, I think questioning precedes charges.

Re:Yeah

[PopeRatzo]

First off, the parent was talking about any two-bit thug who decides that he wants to evade arre

Oh, fuck you.

If Dick Cheney was in London, you think the government of the UK would storm the US embassy to arrest him? And yes, there are formal charges of war crimes pending against Cheney. So, a bullshit rape charge vs war crimes... Are the guys from Barclays that manipulated LIBOR causing theft that could go into the trillions of dollars in custody? But, oh, no, they need to cause an act of war to get Julian Assange who is accused of "pressing his penis against a sleeping woman whom he happened to be sleeping with. I guess you can expect this from a country that let a bunch of Nazis take their fortune to South America with little more than a tally-ho, but for Assange, dammit, "the law is the law". And you're going on about "Britain is fully with their rights.." What is wrong with you?

There are some powerful swells that are pissed at Assange for making them look foolish. That's the alpha and the omega of this thing.

Assange may be a total jerk and someone who would have consensual sex with a woman without a condom when the woman said she wanted him to wear a condom, or the charges against him could be completely bogus. But these supposed charges do not rise to the level requiring the attack of a foreign embassy.

"Storm the Ecuadorian embassy" my ass. All because Assange provided confirmation to the people of Britain that people in their government are asshats, as they have long believed.

Re:Yeah

[Vaphell]

somehow UK didn't do shit in when someone liberally sprayed bullets with submachine gun from the 1st floor of Libyan embassy at anti-libyan protesters in 1984.
1 killed policewoman, 10 wounded
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yvonne_Fletcher

murder vs no-rape rape - that does not compute.

Re:Yeah

[Anonymous Coward]

The Ecuadorian Embassy are the ones who OFFERED asylum because they appreciated what was in the Wikileaks cables. Assange didn't just show up on their doorstep demanding a favor. Why are you shilling so hard for the CIA? 90% of the posts in your user profile are anti-Assange attacks.

Wikileaks is the only reason Bin Laden was killed. They leaked documents that revealed the CIA knew Bin Laden's courier was based in Abottabad. The USA then had no chance but to get him before Pakistani intelligence moved him again. Are you mad Bin Laden was caught for some reason? Do you have some financial interests in a continued American troop presence in South Asia? Maybe you should come clean.

Re:Yeah

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, except the host state can't just enter except in an emergency, like a fire, earthquake, or rampage. Entering under color of the host's legal process is exactly the type of thing banned by treaty and international law.

They can close the embassy, but they can't just do it willy-nilly. They have to give notice, reasonable time to allow the staff to wind up, and safe exit. If Assange is successfully appointed a diplomat, then they have to let him go. If they disagree with the appointment, they can declare their intention to treat him as non-staff, but must first give him reasonable time to leave.

By treaty a country could appoint as a staff member someone with third-party nationality. Although that can be subject to change ahead of time, and it's unclear what the rule is in the UK wrt Ecuador.

See the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations:

http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/9_1_1961.pdf

Re:Yeah

[Rei]

And I let my rapist walk me back to my f***ing car and waited for him while he peed on the street. Have you never heard of "shock" before? Do you have any clue how hard it is to get yourslf to accept the fact that you've been raped? As soon as he left she immediately cleaned up and washed everything in her apartment, especially the semen spot on her bed, after washing herself, and then called her friends, distraught (matching their testimony).

Like most people, I couldn't get myself to file charges. I just wanted to forget about it. I couldn't imagine going through a trial, having to face him more, and all of the smears that I know would have been directed against me for being some "slut trying to ruin an innocent man's life". And he was a nobody, not someone with a legion of millions of global fans. I mean, my god, I've seen websites about these women that are basically stalker sites.

I did nothing. But if I had found out shortly after that he had done the *same sort of thing thing* to another girl right around the same time as what he did to me? I still don't know if I would have filed charges, but it definitely would have changed the picture.

But let's suppose that something unconsentual has taken place here.

During sleep it's *always* non-consentual. A sleeping person *cannot consent*, period.

then I will publicly come out here and eat my words.

You'll need to do more than eat your words. What is the proper way to apologize for smearing rape victims?

Re:Yeah

[Obfuscant]

Close and embassy and storming one are two very different things.

Yes, just as "the UK threatened to storm", and "Ecuadoran ambassador claims the UK threatened to storm" are two very different things.

Storming an embassy involves sending and armed attack force into another countries sovereign territory.

Once you've revoked diplomatic status, it's not "another countries sovereign territory" anymore. And we're still left with the fact that the only proof of the claim that the UK threatened to storm anything is from an Ecuadoran diplomat who wants to save face and twist the situation so Ecuador looks good.

The british spokesman was pretty clear in talking about resolving the issue without any "storming" involved.

Re:Yeah

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

You'll need to do more than eat your words. What is the proper way to apologize for smearing rape victims?

You might be right about Assange, but you undermine your position on his guilt when you take a criticism of this case and generalize it like that. It makes it look like you are transferring your personal circumstances onto this case. That's no better than people knee-jerk defending Assange simply because of the laudable goals of the wikileaks organization.

Re:Yeah

[TheGratefulNet]

"me thinks thou doth protest too much"

that's my thought about the hissy fit the US and the UK are throwing.

HOW could this guy be so important that they want to risk the egg-on-face that they'd get by 'storming' a peaceful embassy?

this would be brought up again and again. the UK would never live it down. they'd try but it would come back to haunt them again and again. big bully attacking a defenseless asylum seeker over trumped up bullshit charges.

if the UK wants to 'streisand itself' so to speak, it's its right, but they have to accept that they'll be laughing stocks of the world, worse than they are now.

Re:Yeah

[morkk]

The moment he is back in the authorities' hands Obama will declare him a terrorist and then it's game over - he will be outside the purview of the courts thanks to the "special arrangements" in place since 911.

Re:Yeah

[donaggie03]

Surely, you realize that any action or nonaction by the UK and Ecuador would not be governed by such trifling technicalities right? What matters here is basically the court of public opinion, where the "public" is all the other nations of the world. If foreign governments are going to condemn the UK for storming an Ecuadorian embassy, they are not going to sit back and say "Oh, you closed the embassy half an hour earlier, all ok then!"

But let's pretend that technicalities do matter. Then I would suggest that technically, the British government would have to officially declare the embassy closed and give the embassy officials ample time to not only leave the country, but to secure and transport their communications, electrical systems, etc.

Re:Yeah

[donaggie03]

It doesn't matter what the arrest warrant says. All that matters is whether Ecuadorian officials believe Mr. Assange is being politically prosecuted. Hell, even that doesn't matter. All that matters is that the Ecuadorian officials, with a semi-straight face, say they believe Mr. Assange is being politically prosecuted. And that's all it takes because the official excuse for prosecution does not always equal the true reason for prosecution, and everyone knows this.

Re:Yeah

[sabri]

There is no such thing as an international right for asylum in an embassy, except within the confines of Article 14 of the UDHR, which involves only prosecution for political crimes. Rape is not a political crime. The arrest warrant has "rape" checked as the reason.

Yes, like the Russian Government issue arrest warrants for "tax evasion" for people who oppose that KGB agent in charge of the country.

I'm personally no fan of Wikileaks and imho they have done more harm than good, but this hole thing smells like it is politically motivated. If it looks like a pig and smells like a pig, don't put lipstick on it because it will stay a pig.

Re:Yeah

[MechaStreisand]

Fine, then. But if you do that, you can't go back later and then claim rape. Because then there's zero evidence that that's what it was, some evidence to the contrary, and if we allow people to act as though they are happy with someone and nothing bad happened and then later on claim that a rape occurred, and we take that claim as all the evidence that we need, then we have a fucking tyranny. There needs to be EVIDENCE. You can't go ahead and create evidence that directly contradicts the idea that a rape occurred and then charge someone without anything else to back up the claim.

Re:Yeah

[fredprado]

Fine, send someone to question him in the embassy as offered by the Ecuadorian government.

Re:Yeah

[fredprado]

The law is a UK law. It would be a violation of International law regardless.

Re:Yeah

[BlueStrat]

The US has nothing to worry about. We have plenty of CIA operatives in south America that we can take care of about anything coming our way. Not to mention the Marine guards stationed at our embassies have access to quite a bit of weaponry.

Even US Marines with buttloads of weapons, if holed up in an isolated foreign embassy, can only slightly delay the inevitable, and most likely insure nobody inside is left alive. The CIA isn't exactly batting a thousand these days. Chavez' rise to power is
only one example in S.A. alone, never mind the miscalls in the Middle East, particularly in regard to the "democracies" and "enlightened governance" that were to emerge from the so-called "Arab Spring".

Remember, this would be a foreign government with access to military hardware, not angry college students. Even if one grants the embassy defenders with the ability to repel an armored assault by tanks, unless the embassy also has extensive air defense capabilities and is deep underground, a couple of dumb 1,000-lb bombs or barrages of artillery/mortars and/or unguided HE/AP cluster-rockets commonly found on small military attack helos would pretty much end things.

As for South American countries allying with our enemies, I doubt that would happen over something like this.

Granted, taken alone it wouldn't be that big a deal. But, it's not taken alone, but in addition and in contrast with past treatment and behaviors. A number of S. American nations are already moving towards closer military and political cooperation with enemies of US/UK/Western interests.

Strat

Re:Yeah

[tolan-b]

AFAIUI he is being charged, in Sweden they do an interview before pressing charges. Hence the applicability of the Interpol warrant.

Re:Yeah

[shia84]

Don't worry, enough people are reading it. Noone responded so far, but that's not the point: the most useful thing is probably for you to talk about it, coping and such.

I'm really sorry for you, and I wish the things that happened to you didn't. But (here's the but): from your story, I'm not sure this guy did anything illegal at any point. Morally he's a douchebag, but it's not against the law to be an asshole. It's not illegal to be in a relationship where one side is overbearingly dominant and takes way more than it gives.
There's a reason we don't regulate emotional relationships. It's not illegal to cheat on your spouse, and from what I'm reading, I assume you think it should be. Still most people have the basic attitude that leads to viewing cheating as something that shouldn't be criminalised (me too btw).
Likewise it's not illegal to overinflate yourself just to get a woman into bed, or to keep trying unless he is stopped by things the law says are not allowed. You said you gave him (weak?) signs, but then went along. "Actions say more than words" plus his wishful thinking: "you don't say OK to having sex in order to not appear as a slut, but play along because you want it" ... quite common in men, and I think sex is the expected result. He failed to be a gentleman - not illegal. But rape by definition is... what now?

I don't want to say that it's your own fault, or that you had it coming, because you clearly are the victim of an asshole. Still I have to kinda say that you could have simply walked out of it if you wanted... that's because I can't imagine my neighbour literally pissing over me and me being OK with it (=in my actions) but not really (=in my mind). I'd kick his ass.
If this were my basic attitude, I'd think that it's a problem with myself. Maybe because I'm not a woman (here we go with sexism again :\ but men and women are obviously different), and I don't think you should "attack" yourself.
But if I were your "purely-legal-and-not-at-all-moral lawyer", based on your actions I'd have a hard time finding something to fault that guy for.

He REALLY pissed off governments....

[NeutronCowboy]

Impressive. I think this is the first time I've heard anyone threaten to storm an embassy. I haven't even seen the Chinese do this. Note to everyone: this is what happens if you threaten to thoroughly upend the balance of power, expose secrets everywhere, and generally fuck with people in power. If you do this, you better make sure you have an equally strong power backing you. Otherwise, you will spend the rest of your life in jail, regardless of whether you actually broke any laws.

On the upside, props to Assange. I don't think he saw this coming, but I do think that what he did was a service to the world.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Anonymous Coward]

If the UK does this, I'm pretty sure you'll see a lot of countries pulling their embassies from the there. This isn't a fucking James Bond movie - this is real life. What good is an embassy if it's not sovereign ground?

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[pegasustonans]

Impressive. I think this is the first time I've heard anyone threaten to storm an embassy. I haven't even seen the Chinese do this. Note to everyone: this is what happens if you threaten to thoroughly upend the balance of power, expose secrets everywhere, and generally fuck with people in power. If you do this, you better make sure you have an equally strong power backing you. Otherwise, you will spend the rest of your life in jail, regardless of whether you actually broke any laws.

On the upside, props to Assange. I don't think he saw this coming, but I do think that what he did was a service to the world.

While storming the embassy would be an immediate defeat for Assange, I can't help but think it would prove a massive victory for Wikileaks in the battle over public opinion.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Anonymous Coward]

Storming an embassy is not new. I guess you never heard about the storming of the American embassy in Tehran.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[NeutronCowboy]

Except that Ecuador won't go to war over that. Russia, China, definitely, the rest of the countries probably won't, and Ecuador definitely will cave. It's a complete bluff, but one that Ecuador can't afford - or even is able - to call. Not a bad move on the part of the UK. Too bad that none of the other powers that be are willing to offer Assange asylum. Cuba and Venezuela might be interesting, but neither have any army to back up a dissent, and Venezuela isn't keen on getting embarrassed by Wikileaks either.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[NeutronCowboy]

Except.... how many people actually think that what Assange is doing is right? How many would be ok with strong-arming Ecuador into giving him up? Compare that with how many people are ok to just throw him in the slammer for creating, hosting and advocating Wikileaks. This won't even register on the PR-meter.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[subreality]

Also note that they're threatening to raid the embassy for someone who's alleged crime isn't even treason - this is still over the dubious sex crime charges. It's amazing that that the UK is even considering setting this kind of precedent over a moderate criminal charge, just because he kind of embarrassed them.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[girlintraining]

Oh, us Americans do it all the time; that whole "we have more guns than you" -- It has made us many friends overseas. I understand we were thanked by the citizens of Afghanistan in New York a few years back, in September, for a similar action. It was such a powerful gesture by the international community that we erected monuments and printed millions of bumper stickers to commemorate the occasion. Ever since, we've tried very hard to repeat that successful policy by sending peace envoys all over the world -- 150 countries and counting currently host them! We highly recommend storming embassies to any country who wants to bolster their international reputation.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[ThatsMyNick]

The point is they never have to do it. They only have to threaten to do it and Ecuador has no other choice but to cave in. They cannot afford to go to war with UK or even spoil relations with the UK through a diplomatic spat. Even though they know that the UK wouldnt never do it, the slight chance of that happening would be too much for them.
 
A very clever move. I am pretty sure Ecuador will cave.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[NeutronCowboy]

It's a calculated trade-off: how many countries support getting Assange behind bars, versus how many object to these types of tactics? What are the odds that Ecuador calls their bluff, versus how important is it to have Assange behind bars? How many countries will actually pull their embassies if the UK does storm the Ecuadorian embassy?

All I can say is: this shows just how much trouble he is for the powers that be. Bin Laden is the only other person to qualify for this type of treatment, and he had the good wits to disappear in the mountains of Afghanistan. Actually, I say that in the later years of the Bush administration, bin Laden was seen as less trouble than Assange.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[rrohbeck]

Exactly. A major international incident about this?
Yeah right. This is either a rumor, posturing or somebody in London ready to do some unprecedented US ass kissing.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[sgt_doom]

And this is why VP Joey bin Biden of the USA claims Julian Assange is an international terrorist, while also proclaiming that Egypt's Mubarak wasn't a dictator.

Just a heartbeat from the presidency, huh??

Now, if Julian Assange is an international terrorist, what does that make the bloodiest of Americans, John Negroponte of Yale's Jackson Institute?

http://www.redrat.net/BUSH_WAR/negroponte2.htm
http://warcriminalswatch.org/index.php/the-culpable/36-the-culprits/78-john-negroponte
http://www.ww4report.com/negropontedeathsquad
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/negroponte.htm

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Macgrrl]

Possibly the question isn't will Ecuador stand and call the UK's bluff, but would the UK follow through if forced?

If the UK did in fact storm an embassy and as a consequence violate sovereign state, they are basically saying to anyone who may consider them an 'enemy' that they don't recognise consulates as sovereign territory so their own embassies in foreign countries are then at risk of incursion. Do they really want to do that in China or the Middle East or Africa or anywhere else they may have sensitive relationships?

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Macgrrl]

I'm sure the current UK government longs to be thought of in the same context as Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's Iranian Revolutionary government.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Mitreya]

this shows just how much trouble he is for the powers that be.

I don't understand this part - it isn't like Wikileaks will immediately power down just because Assange is in jail.
Is this simply about making an example out of him?

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[wierd_w]

It depends on how equador wants to play.

Situation 1)
The cave to the UK, and hand over Assange. They do this because of international pressures and the desire to play with the big boys.

Situation 2)
They staunchly refuse to hand over Assange, ad either keep him in the embassy indefinately, or concoct a wild plan to get him out of the UK. They do this because they are tired of being bullied, and want to flip the dirty dealers the bird.

Situation 3)
They refuse to give up assage, and the UK jumps the shark and makes good on its threat to smash the embassy. Equador retaliates on the world stage with a major smear campaign.

Situation 4)
Equador expects the UK to make good on the threat, hides or sneaks assange out of the country, and the UK invades the embassy. Equador shows that assange is not in the country, (Either using false footage, or real footage.) And has not been for some time, and declares the UK's actions unwarranted, and decries their intelligence agencies, and their legitimacy as a peaceful and law abiding nation.

Personally though, if I were an equadorian diplomat, here is what I would do:

Situation 5)
Fabricate a story of helping assange leave the country, and arrange the expected limo trip to an international airport. Place a costumed mannequin in the back seat with darkened windows on the limo. The UK bobbies will attempt to stop the driver. The driver avoids capture, and causes a scene, with the police escallating response. (Think "OJ simpson car chase"). The embassy plays along with the charade, deploring the UK's behavior in the matter. Once a significant portion of the local police force is engaged in the farce, load assange into the back of a delivery lorry, and discretely drive him nonchalantly to france via the chunnel, and evacuate him via plane that way. When the UK storms the embassy, they will not find him.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Daniel Dvorkin]

It's one thing when it happens in the context of a revolution or civil war. It's quite another when it happens between two established, stable countries which normally have peaceful relations.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[VortexCortex]

Say Ecuador calls their bluff. Can the UK storm in and show the world what a real US lapdog looks like? The fact that they would even threaten this shit shows just how FUCKED the world is right now.

He's ONE MAN. He's not breaking into your secure places and leaking your dirty fucking secrets. No, IT'S YOUR OWN PEOPLE who see the corruption and go to him to help them right the wrongs they see. Get rid of Assagnge. "Just do it"(tm). It won't change the fact YOUR OWN PEOPLE have moral problems with the wrongs going down. The right thing to do is STOP DOING EVIL. If you don't think that "making an example" of Assange will just embolden EVERYONE who is privy to questionable government bullshit to find another spokesperson and get the word out, then you really have no idea how Brits and Americans think.

You think "The Streisand Effect" is bad? Just wait till we have an excuse to coin the term "The Assange Effect".

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[lister king of smeg]

If i were Ecuador i would sneak him out a week or so before they announce that he is going to be leaving. that way when the storm the embassy looking for him they will come of as fools and in the process and causing a international incident of epic proportion gaining huge amounts of distrust of england internationally.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[The Rizz]

Ecuador has no other choice but to cave in. They cannot afford to go to war with UK

Are you sure you don't have that backwards? If the UK initiates an act of war against another foreign power, especially over something as controversial as this, they'll have a lot of foreign powers extremely pissed at them. They will be seen as the aggressor, and Ecuador as the underdog. This is going to cause massive problems both with foreign relations, and within their own country ("we went to war over what now!?").

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Anonymous Coward]

And I am pretty sure that the UK will cave when China and Russia decide not to have embassies in a country barbaric enough not to honor the diplomatic system. The world has had it up to HERE with the US, and US-inspired cowboy grandstanding.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Dunbal]

You're missing the fact that China has been investing heavily in Latin America over the past decade or so. A lot of countries down here see that the future is China, who is their new powerful friend. So while the West threatens and adopts a dictatorial tone when offering "trade agreements" that are a great deal - for the US oh and by the way you need to change your laws to match ours if you want in on this agreement - China has been building bridges, roads, stadiums, hospitals... with no strings attached.

This is not the 1980's and if the people paid to make the decisions are using that playbook they are in for a shock, in my opinion. The desire to "play with the big boys" no longer means kissing American ass.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[cheater512]

Same net international effect. They might be able to do it, but the instant they do every single embassy in the UK will not be happy.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[LordLucless]

Do you really think people in this league of politics are impressed by technicalities? Yes, they could, and it would be legal. But even if they give it back after they've gained forced entry and made an arrest, the damage is done. The moment they do, every other country will have the option of exercising that same perfectly legal right against all of Britain's embassies. At the very least, I'd expect the British to be packed off home from Ecuador, and any other country that's pissed at Britmerica has a golden opportunity to expose their hypocritical concepts of "democracy" on the world stage.

They would be provoking a major international diplomatic incident, quite probably with multiple, powerful countries involved, over (allegedly) whether Assange spends a week picking up trash in Stockholme.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[sjames]

Why not, there could be no question who the aggressor is. Ecuador produces oil and if Syria flakes, the U.K. will really need a new supplier. They don't depend on the U.K. for much of anything and while smaller, their economy is stronger than the U.K.

They could pare the staff down to Assange and a couple military police (to have token Ecuadorians there) and just let the invasion happen.

Does anyone out there still believe all of this is related to what amounts to a charge of turning out to be a douche (which has yet to even be formally charged)?

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Xiroth]

This isn't just about their own population. Violating the sovereignty of a friendly nation's embassy contravenes centuries of international law. This is the kind of action one would only expect from a rogue state.

Among other things, if they do this, you can expect the European Parliament to come down *hard* on one of their member states for violating international law, and therefore damaging the standing of the European Union in international negotiations.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[dkleinsc]

I understand we were thanked by the citizens of Afghanistan in New York a few years back, in September, for a similar action.

You understand incorrectly: we were thanked by a few of the citizens of Saudi Arabia, a couple of folks from U.A.E., and an Egyptian. They wanted to repay us for our longstanding support of the dictatorial governments in their countries, including sending our guys out to die for those dictators in 1991.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Grave]

That's a technicality that is irrelevant. The parent post is correct-if they storm an embassy over something so trivial, then a whole lot of risk is now transferred over to diplomats trying to keep dangerous situations in other countries from blowing up. As soon as something goes awry, nations will have to pull their diplomatic personnel out instead of trying to work through the problem. Otherwise, they run the risk of seeing their people killed in embassy attacks.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[TubeSteak]

I understand we were thanked by the citizens of Afghanistan in New York a few years back, in September, for a similar action.

Saudi Arabia: fifteen hijackers
United Arab Emirates: two hijackers
Lebanon: one hijacker
Egypt: one hijacker

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[khallow]

It is an awful big threat for someone who wasn't even breaking UK law aside from evading the extradition to Sweden. And I must wonder what got Ecuador to grant asylum.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Chuck Chunder]

A very clever move. I am pretty sure Ecuador will cave.

I'm not sure it's that clever. The UK probably has more at stake than Ecuador does, ie all the UK embassies and diplomats around the world that depend on the conventions surrounding diplomatic status. If the UK is seen to weaken that convention it will be politically harder for them to demand others respect it making UK embassies more vulnerable.

I thought this would be "worked out" and Assange will be coughed up. Probably because money would change hands behind the scenes (either to individuals or "aid" to Ecuador).

Now I am not so sure, it may be politically impossible (internally) for the Ecuador politicians to back down.

Many critics of Assange claim Wikileaks damaged diplomacy by exposing it's inner workings. Even if that is true it is nothing compared to the damage that would be done by revoking the status of an embassy over an asylum seeker.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Gryle]

Somewhat off-topic: Don't be fooled. China's strings simply aren't as obvious.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Genda]

In fact making an example of him that can be seen from mars without aid of telescope. The very next thing the US Government wants leaked to the world at large is a video of Assange, bent over about 30 tons of C4, while a laser guided missile with video camera output records what would be the world's first televised high explosive enema. There is the quote by Gwen Goodnight "If you can't be a good example, you'll just have to be a horrible warning." It would appear Assange is trying to accomplish both at the same time.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Rei]

It really has nothing to do with Assange at this point. It has to do with whether a person can escape the UK justice system. He could be a guy accused of stealing a frozen chicken dinner from the local Iceland, but if he was escaping charges confirmed by their high court and jumping bail and creating an international incident, the *last* thing they want is him to have some sort of successful resolution out of it that will encourage others to likewise try to evade the UK justice system

And, FYI, two courts in the UK found the charges against him credible and that they'd be a violation of UK law if they occurred there.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[brokeninside]

Exactly right, the actual wording of the letter can be found in box at the link to TFA.

Foreign minister Ricardo Patino said the letter from the UK to Ecuador stated: ``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.''

It went on: ``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.''

So, for example, the UK could end its recognition of Ecuador's diplomats so that they all go home and the embassy is no longer an embassy. At this point, the UK could storm the building but the building would no longer be Ecuador's diplomatic mission to the UK.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[drmofe]

The UK stormed the Libyan embassy way back in the 1980s to capture a gunman who had shot a British police officer. This is a totally different situation and will be very interesting to see who the diplomatic world reacts.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I get the impression that the Vienna Convention is one of those things that diplomat types take fairly seriously.

I'd certainly be hiring some extra rentacops if I were a british diplomat posted overseas right about now...

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[symbolset]

The technical term for the offense is "Speaking Truth to Power". It's the closest thing to a universal capital offense. I am quite sure he saw this coming. So brave.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Genda]

Try this instead. Have a high publicity event for children, bring in 2 dozen French Clowns. Pick one clown for height and physicality match to Assange. Have another Assange body double smuggled into the embassy. Have Body doubles made up exactly as the same clown. Surreptitiously have clowns trade places in such a way that some people can see the exchange. Take Assange body double #1 and use him to perform previously mentioned decoy while clowns are driving off back to France. All the while Assange is made up as an old crippled fat woman in a wheel chair watching the performance with the children, and quietly driven off after the show. The police being suspicious as hell chase the first decoy. A couple bright Bobbies think this is too easy and follow the clowns. Assange drives to Liverpool where he boards a freighter bound for Venezuela as a black crewman. All is right with the world and Assange lives to blog another day.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[symbolset]

There is a point at which sovereign nations pushed beyond the realm of reason do things they cannot afford to do. We may be getting there for Ecuador.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[flimflammer]

They're not even sex charges! Since he's only wanted for questioning, this could have, should have, and would have in any other situation been done over the phone or in person outside of Sweden. No charges have actually been filed. However they don't want to do that. They want him in Sweden over mere questioning and are trying to get him extradited for it, to the point they're willing to invade an embassy which has all sorts of political implications to accomplish the goal? Over questioning? The whole thing makes you want to facepalm. Even if you don't believe all the conspiracy theories, it's hard to just shrug all this off.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[subreality]

All of which is true - but none of this is normally grounds to go invade a foreign embassy.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Hadlock]

Central america and the northern portion of south america have been on a bit of an independent streak lately. They're much further in bed with the Chinese and Japanese than they are with the UK, who never had any formal colonies there. Most of central america and a good portion of south america have started decriminalizing drugs in the leadup to the election 2012, risking US foreign aid in the process in trade for the safety of their citizens. Unlike Africa and Eastern Europe, south america is mostly independent of the rest of the world - they fed europe during both world wars - and their standard of living, in the big cities at least, is on par with most of the rest of the world. Cutting ties with the UK is much lower on their list of "risky behavior" compared to a superpower like China who is dumping billions of dollars in to their economies each year with no strings attached.
 
TL;DR the natives are educated and not dependent on western europe anymore, and have little need for their political shenanigans.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[starcraftsicko]

All of these 'situations' assume embassies that look a lot like the embassies that the US or Britain might normally have in foreign capitals.... Big mansion-like buildings surrounded by a fence... certainly something with a nice private place for a limo to pull up and still be on embassy grounds. Equador doesn't have one of those.

Equador has a bit of office space in the middle of a building that has other office space. There is no private helipad or carport or other place to try any of the 'situations' that anyone has suggested. You can safely assume that he elevators/doors/stairs/windows are under surveillance. There'll be no sneaking.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[NewtonsLaw]

When will countries like the USA and UK realize that they really don't need any more enemies than they already have.

Invading a sovereign nation's embassy with armed force is effectively a declaration of war.

Now Ecuador isn't going to send an armada of naval vessels or a wave of bombers to strike back at the UK -- but you can bet that a good number of terrorists will use this as justification for making more strikes against both the UK and the USA.

Is this what the UK and USA really want?

Well I'm sorry to say but it probably is.

If the UK seize Assange from the Ecuadorian Embassy, he's extradited to Sweden and from there back to the USA, I have absolutely *no* doubt at all that there will be a new wave of terror attacks against both nations -- as retribution.

This will give the UK and USA governments just what they want -- an ability to say "see, Assange was evil and probably working with these terrorists to destabilize the West -- the proof is here in these new attacks".

Of course, like typical politicians, they won't care that hundreds or possibly thousands of innocent souls may lose their lives to attacks that could make 9/11 look like a childrens' tea-party.

I'm starting to think that this world is going to hell in a handbasket. I just hope that the great-unwashed public wise-up to the way they're being used and abused by politicians right across the globe.

Rob the public blind to the tune of billions (like the bankers have) and you get away with it -- in fact, governments will even pay your debts for you.

Steal a can of beans from a supermarket because you are hungry can't afford a meal and they'll lock you up.

This crap has to end soon -- doesn't it?

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[subreality]

No, the sex crime being "pressuring to continue when she wanted a condom, despite an implicit, but not explicit, 'no'". It's a lesser thing than what most of the world calls rape, but it's more than you suggest.

It's still certainly not an excuse to invade foreign soil.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Sulphur]

Actually, I say that in the later years of the Bush administration, bin Laden was seen as less trouble than Assange.

He still is.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[A nonymous Coward]

Sure Assange is an asshole. Maybe he really did rape those women. But this is not the kind of charge you use as an excuse to become the first modern country to storm an embassy. Even the worst enemies in WW II didn't do that. Iran did, but their provocation was far worse than extradition for a dubious rape charge, and the world condemned them for it.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[NewtonsLaw]

And to think... if he'd kept his dick in his trousers he'd be home and free right now.

Testosterone has a lot to answer for! :-)

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[A nonymous Coward]

It's all of Latin America. Do you really think any of Britain's embassies there would be protected by the local police? Do you really think trade would continue as if nothing happened?

Do you really think Latin Americans have no pride and no memory of past colonial abuses?

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[A nonymous Coward]

No. Embassies are foreign soil. The British would be wrong under international law to enter without permission, under every possible circumstance.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[sabri]

Oh, us Americans do it all the time; that whole "we have more guns than you" -- It has made us many friends overseas.

Despite your sarcastic attempt to prove the contrary, you actually did.

If it would not have been for the brave Americans, I would be speaking German by now.
If it would not have been for the brave Americans, half of APAC would be speaking Japanese by now.
If it would not have been for the brave Americans, whole Iraq would still be terrorized by Saddam and his family.
If it would not have been for the brave Americans, Kuwait would still be a province of Iraq.
If it would not have been for the brave Americans, every schoolgirl in Afghanistan would be shot by the Taliban.
If it would not have been for the brave Americans, we would not have a rover on Mars today.

I'm not American by birth, but I am proud to live in the U.S. (but the way this whole Assange thing is handled, is not something I find to be in spirit with the American Way, as I learned it while living here).

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[girlintraining]

If it would not have been for the brave Americans, I would be speaking German by now. If it would not have been for the brave Americans, half of APAC would be speaking Japanese by now. If it would not have been for the brave Americans, whole Iraq would still be terrorized by Saddam and his family. If it would not have been for the brave Americans, Kuwait would still be a province of Iraq. If it would not have been for the brave Americans, every schoolgirl in Afghanistan would be shot by the Taliban. If it would not have been for the brave Americans, we would not have a rover on Mars today.

I can also come up with a list. It's not as flattering as yours, but it's just as patriotic:
If it would not have been for the brave Americans, a hundred thousand japanese would not have been turned into carbon scorch marks.
If it would not have been for the brave Americans, many thousands of their citizens of japanese descent wouldn't have been held in concentration camps.
If it would not have been for the brave Americans, millions of blacks wouldn't have been imported here and then enslaved.
If it would not have been for the brave Americans, the native americans who lived here before would still be alive, before we wiped them out by giving them blankets laced with small pox -- an act of genocide using a weapon of mass destruction.
If it would not have been for the brave Americans... ah, well, the list goes on.

That's the problem I have with patriotism: It only acknowledges what we do right, and minimizes, rationalizes, or dismisses what we did wrong. We have wronged a lot of people out there -- and I can't be proud of that, no matter how it's sugar coated or rationalized. If we're going to be world leaders, we need to learn to say we're sorry once in awhile, and put things right again. Right now, we're more thugs than leaders, enforcing our view of the world at the end of a gun, rather than a pen. For the country that created the internet, the most democratic form of communication ever created, it shouldn't be that way.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[viperidaenz]

They don't have to "storm in". All they have to do is announce they will be entering a week before they do, trot on in with some hand cuffs and walk back out with what they said they were going to take. It's part of the UK law that allows the embassy to exist in the first place.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Splab]

There is a heck of a difference between threatening (and subsequently booting) an embassy and storming it.

In the first case you usually give them X hours/days to pack their gear up and vacate the property, while stile retaining diplomatic immunity - this is the normally the first steps of having a War.

When storming an embassy you are basically declaring war and starting it in one go.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[fredprado]

The basis of international diplomacy is reciprocity. If you screw up with my guys I will screw up with yours. If UK arbitrarily ignores diplomatic immunity within their soil, they will automatically make their diplomats vulnerable to the same fate throughout the world. It will be a high cost to pay just for Assange.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[Esteanil]

Embassies universally have a lot of internal safeties. Tunnels out, many stories of bunkers under the main building or complex, secured rooms for destroying materials in the event of an attack, and a plethora of secret rooms and content-destroying safes. I doubt even little Ecuador has missed out on this.

There is probably already a plan in place. Assanage is on a lower level and has instructions on where to go if they get the intercom that the UK authorities HAVE truly lost their minds and are storming the place. In the time it takes them to get anywhere near him in the building, he'll be in a place that would take a crew with penetrating radar several days to find, assuming he's not long gone out a tunnel.

While your version undoubtedly would make a better action movie, I think your realism level suffers as a result. :-P

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[sabri]

If it would not have been for the brave Americans, a hundred thousand japanese would not have been turned into carbon scorch marks.

You're rewriting history here. There are some pretty good documentaries on Netflix about Hirosjima and Nagaski. Technically you are right, but the Japanese government made the choice by themselves. They had the option to surrender before Hirosjima. After Hirosjima, before Nagasaki, they had the option to surrender. They chose not to. Had the U.S. not used the weapon, the war could (and probably would) have cost millions of more lives.

If it would not have been for the brave Americans, many thousands of their citizens of japanese descent wouldn't have been held in concentration camps.

You are correct here. Did the U.S. government ever apologize for this?

If it would not have been for the brave Americans, millions of blacks wouldn't have been imported here and then enslaved.

And the Dutch. And the English. And the Spanish. That was a thing of that era.

If it would not have been for the brave Americans, the native americans who lived here before would still be alive, before we wiped them out by giving them blankets laced with small pox -- an act of genocide using a weapon of mass destruction.

That's even longer ago. You can't compare our generations with generations centuries ago. If it would not have been for the Catholic Church, no suspected witch would ever have been burned. Same story, same history lesson.

If it would not have been for the brave Americans... ah, well, the list goes on.

I get your point, I really do. But instead of focusing on the negative sides of your country, focus on the positive ones. Every society can be evil. I chose to live in the U.S. because at this point in time I feel that the U.S. is the less evil of all (is that proper grammar?). There are things that I disagree with, like Guantanamo, like Assange, like Manning, like the TSA's groping, but in the end, it's not that bad.

And I have seen the U.S. say sorry many times. For example after the Qu'ran burnings were in the news. For example after some idiot soldiers treated prisoners like shit.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[CodeBuster]

I think you underestimate the British security services. Do you really think that putting a mannequin in the back of a limo and then driving Assange out through the Chunnel in a delivery van "while they're not looking" has even the slightest chance of success? The entire London areas is covered in security cameras and sensors and there are hundreds of security personnel and law enforcement, with thousands more available on short notice, arranged in concentric layers around the embassy. An ant couldn't escape the Ecuadorian embassy without the British seeing it, so how much less Assange? There will be no "sneaking out" for Assange, it's either official safe passage out or he doesn't go.

Re:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[The Rizz]

Uh, no. Not even close. According to the article you linked to, the US Supreme Court decided that one small portion of the Vienna Convention hadn't been enacted in US law, and therefore a lawful conviction under US law wouldn't be overturned on the small technicality that that portion of the Vienna Convention was not specifically followed.

NOTE: The technicality in question being that while the arresting officers read him his rights, they did not inform him he could contact his embassy. Note that they did not refuse him contact , they just did not inform him that he could ask for it.

Additionally, the International Court of Justice ruled on this case that the defendant was "entitled to review and reconsideration of their convictions and sentences". Multiple appeals courts and even the US Supreme court heard arguments on this case afterwards, and found nothing to overturn the verdict.

This is hideous

[richardcavell]

The inviolability of an embassy is critically important to diplomatic relations. If British police set a precedent here, it will cause embassies around the world to militarize, causing tension. I hope it's just a hollow threat made by some idiot who doesn't understand the situation properly.

If we could ask the writers of yesteryear...

[camperslo]

What would Aldous Huxley say about all this? It's interesting to look at what some said over half a century ago.

On 21 October 1949, Huxley wrote to George Orwell, author of Nineteen Eighty-Four, congratulating him on "how fine and how profoundly important the book is". In his letter to Orwell, he predicted:

 

Within the next generation I believe that the world's leaders will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience.

Re:If we could ask the writers of yesteryear...

[Penurious Penguin]

I think you put half the world into a nutshell with that last paragraph. How dare we ask for information, and after being denied, deceived and abused, actually take it. And yet so many people think these leaks are somehow more unpatriotic than waging illegal wars that produce millions of casualties, lying and spying, parasiting the economy with Haliburtons, Blackwaters and endless dead-end military contracts while we watch the collective IQ of the US dissipate as quickly as the smoke on the 4th of July.

Rights

[girlintraining]

Yes, how very civilized of you, Britain. The "I'm right because I have more guns" position has made us Americans so many friends internationally. I'm sure diplomats and foreign dignitaries will be thrilled to hear that you're going to storm their embassies.

Will be really surprised if they storm the place

[John3]

The UK government has already stated that they will not let Assange leave the country, so he's stuck in that embassy anyway. There have been rumors of smuggling him to the airport in a diplomatic limo, or hiring him as a diplomat, but those are not practical and the UK could detain him once he left the embassy grounds. So why bother storming the embassy?

If by chance they do storm the embassy then it will be obvious that the US government stepped up the pressure and got impatient. Get the popcorn out, this could get interesting.

A Joke?

[charlesr44403]

Is this a joke? Can the most civilized nation on earth sink to the level of the state criminals who stormed the American embassy in Iran?

Oh, Really?

[Greyfox]

I wouldn't say his crimes warrant a major diplomatic incident. Unless there's actually something to what he's been saying all along...

Re:Oh, Really?

[Jiro]

It is certainly possible for there to be nothing important, in the sense of not revealing any whistleblower type of information, while still being dangerous, in the sense that a hostile person could use the information to kill or blackmail someone or disrupt a diplomatic operation.

Imagine that I published your credit card number to the world. That information isn't important to members of the general public, but it still puts your bank account in jeopardy. The two aren't contradictory.

An Ugly Precedent

[camionbleu]

Here is the message that I've sent to David Cameron this evening,. If anyone else feels strongly about this and wishes to use my text, please feel free. You can reach him here.

Dear Mr Cameron,

I have read reports in the international press this evening, citing Ecuador's Foreign Minister, that the UK is considering entering the London Embassy of Ecuador without Ecuador's permission in order to arrest Mr Julian Assange, who is seeking refuge there.

I strongly urge the UK not to take this action, which would be a violation of Article 22 of the Vienna Convention. It would set an ugly precedent that would not be lost on other countries. Historically, the UK has valued the rule of law. When the UK contravenes international law, it sends a very unfortunate message to other countries who do not value the rule of law. That message is: "you, too, can ride roughshod over international law".

If the UK enters the Embassy of Ecuador without permission I predict that other countries will use this chilling precedent to do likewise, perhaps against a UK embassy.

Please seek a peaceful agreement with Ecuador.

Re:An Ugly Precedent

[Daniel Dvorkin]

Well, that should get you on some interesting lists.

Re:An Ugly Precedent

[camionbleu]

You could well be right in that he does not care. But let's look at it from a different point of view. If everyone treated their elected officials in this way (and the elected officials of other countries for international issues such as this) it would be very hard for them to ignore us. Some people say there's no point in writing to politicians because we have no power. But I prefer to behave as if I do have power because if everyone did so, it would become true (despite all the corruption of politics caused by money).

We can either be part of the problem or part of the solution. In general, I'm a "shades of grey" kind of person but that's one issue that I believe is very clear cut. We have to take action (peacefully and legally). Writing to politicians will not solve everything but it's a good start.

Re:Will be really surprised if they storm the plac

[SecurityTheatre]

An allegation of sexual impropriety which is usually punished by a term of a few weeks community service and seldom jail time.

It's a bit important to recognize this as well.

Murder of Yvonne Fletcher

[Anonymous Coward]

They didn't even storm the Libyan Embassy when a Police officer was murdered from the Embassy itself back in (you guessed it) 1984.

The British surrounded the Embassy for 11 days, after which the Libyans reciprocated - and that is the appropriate response. Perhaps with other LatAm countries in solidarity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Yvonne_Fletcher

Re:Will be really surprised if they storm the plac

[sgt_doom]

And yet, they happily allow Russian assassins and Libyan terrorists to leave??????

Re:Will be really surprised if they storm the plac

[girlintraining]

There have been rumors of smuggling him to the airport in a diplomatic limo, or hiring him as a diplomat, but those are not practical and the UK could detain him once he left the embassy grounds. So why bother storming the embassy?

A diplomat's vehicle is considered sovereign land because it can contain diplomatic wires. Most countries would consider removing anything, or any person, from a diplomat's vehicle an act of war, the same as if they'd broken into the embassy. Now they might not exchange bullets over the matter, but you can be assured that diplomatic relations between Britain and many other countries will be harmed considerably. If they do this, nobody will trust them with their embassies again... I mean, if they're willing to storm an embassy and in the process compromising the national security and highly classified diplomatic wires of another government, violating the treaties signed between the two governments, all to to capture a guy for revealing low-level intelligence of a wholly separate government... Well, Britain simply won't be trusted after that for a long time.

Civilized?????

[sgt_doom]

Hmmm...somebody's neglected their history, but they do have the longest continuing corporation in history, and perhaps the oldest one in the Western Hemisphere, the City of London Corporation --- look it up sometime, a very, very interesting history, especially how they purchased the monarchy back circa 1700s (S.I.L.O. arrangement).

Sure

[Murdoch5]

He didn't even do anything!! He owned a site which released documents that everyone had a RIGHT to see. Just because a document is classified doesn't mean the public shouldn't be aware. He shouldn't be arrested or in trouble, he should be thanked for releasing information that frankly is everyone's business.

check out the Equatorian statement:

[Anonymous Coward]

“Today we have received from the United Kingdom an explicit threat in writing that they could assault our embassy in London if Ecuador does not hand over Julian Assange,” Mr. Patiño said, adding defiantly, “We are not a British colony.”

This will get messy.

Also I find it hilarious that the NY Times coverage says the UK threatens to "barge in to the embassy", you know like just rudely walking instead of the full on assault that they are really planning. NY Times may be liberal domestically but it's a CIA shill when it comes to international news.

Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Taco Cowboy]

No matter if the guy has raped that Swedish girl or not, - that's not the main point, for that "rape story" has become an excuse for UK to take action on behalf of Uncle Sam/

By doing so, UK no longer honors its own sovereignty.

A sovereign nation is like a free, dignified person, an entity that takes up action to protect it/him/herself, and has the freedom to do whatever it/he/she wants to do.

United Kingdom, by threatening to storm the embassy of another nation, over a person whom we all know Uncle Sam wants, is no longer a nation which I respect - and I suspect I am not alone in not regarding UK as a dignified country no more.
 

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[second_coming]

The British government are not the country, I doubt there are many people in the UK who would support this action and even fewer who are happy with the way the government sucks up to the US.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Dunbal]

But you were cool with them

A little reminder: neither you nor I were alive when that happened. This kind of dipshit thinking is what keeps places like the middle east at war for 5000 years.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Taco Cowboy]

The British government are not the country, I doubt there are many people in the UK who would support this action and even fewer who are happy with the way the government sucks up to the US.

 
If THAT's the case, then CHANGE YOUR GOVERNMENT, for crying out loud !!
 
You guys in UK are still calling yourself a "democratic country", right?
 
You still have the right to change your government, right?
 
  RIGHT ??
 

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Goaway]

Yes, the UK is doing the US's bidding by... sending Assange to Sweden.

That makes so much more sense than something silly like sending him to the US.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[anagama]

Yeah right. You might as well suggest Americans change their government, but average Joes are in the same position the world over: bent over at the waist clutching their ankles saying "do it again please."

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[TheGratefulNet]

oh, CHILL THE FARK OUT.

they can't change their country any more than we can.

we're both fucked.

the brits are basically good people but they have totally lost control over their gov.

same with us in the US.

if you think its so easy to change, you, maybe, can show us ignorant peasants how its done??

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Anonymous Coward]

hahahaha, you think your measly vote is going to change anything when you have a choice between dick head 1 and dick head 2.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Anonymous Coward]

> if you think its so easy to change, you, maybe, can show us ignorant peasants how its done??

Well, the French did it, ask them. But it wasn't pretty, I tell you.

Also, a piece of advice to US and Brit governments: don't try to please the people with little cakes... last time it didn't work.

Now, seriously, it's not just the USA and the Brits, other countries have problematic governments doing foolhardy follies -- e.g. Russia.

If those who can intervene do nothing, that might mean a much bloodier process down the river (see Libya and Syria, for example).

We live in a globalized world now. That means we must pay attention to the big picture, it's not just the US (or UK) way anymore; everybody is looking... even if you get Assange, that will not be seen with good eyes by other in the world (given the reasons to get him -- and don't come up with that "rape" bullshit, again). The UK is already looking like some Banana Republic if the law is "flexible" so that embassies can be made inexistent overnight.

What good is having any embassy in UK if things are that way? And if our embassy isn't worth a penny, why would we harbour a British embassy over here? To drink tea at 5? Duh!

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[arth1]

No matter if the guy has raped that Swedish girl or not, - that's not the main point, for that "rape story" has become an excuse for UK to take action on behalf of Uncle Sam

Stop drinking the Kool-Aid. If the US wanted him extradited, it would be much easier to get him extradited from the UK to the US than from Sweden.
This is Sweden that wants him for questioning, and the UK has agreed to extradite him. It's that simple. Don't try to complicate it with conspiracy theories.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Anonymous Coward]

The United States is worse... attacking free speech, while violating the Constitution in a manner that is treasonous.

Go figure - the good guy is counted as a terrorist while the government actually becomes the terrorist organization.

That is not what I signed up for when I served. Perhaps our Armed Services who are sworn to uphold the constitution should do something about the flagrant violations being perpetrated by the FBI/CIA/DHS/Pentagon/RIAA/MPAA and put an end to these rampant terrorist acts being perpetrated by them.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Jeremy Allison - Sam]

Damn, and you were doing so well there for a minute....

But then you criticised the NHS (National Health Service, for non-Brits).

Now most other things about the UK can be considered shitty (as with the US), but the one thing that *DOES* work in the UK is the NHS.

Don't fuck with it. No one wants a US-style (aka built by and for private insurance companies) healthcare "system" (in quotes because it really doesn't work over here) in the UK.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[conspirator57]

Hell, their people have lost control over their government and their government has lost control over its sovereignty to the EU. All the "savings" made by the austerity in the UK in the past few years have been eaten by the vast increases in the UK's mandated "contribution" to the EU. That means that the average joe there pays like they're getting socialist benefits while getting fewer and fewer of them. And the national debt there is still going the wrong direction.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[rgbrenner]

Hold on for a second. You're saying the AC was not alive in 1945? How the hell do you know that.

The british empire began to fall apart after WWII... there are hundreds of millions of people still alive who remember British rule around the world. There are millions right here in the US.

It may not be relevant to this discussion.. but you don't get to pretend history from 65 years ago is ancient history.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Bespoke]

Damn, and you were doing so well there for a minute.... But then you mentioned the Daily Mail (right-wing tabloid, for non-Brits - like The Sun without the tits) as your source for information about the NHS. Now most other things about the UK can be considered shitty (as with the US), but the one thing that *IS FOR CERTAIN* shitty in the UK is the Daily Fail. ;-)

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[GCsoftware]

>Perhaps it does, but whenever I read something about the NHS, its a sad story in the Daily Mail about some doctor making a silly mistake that takes a way a father or mother from their children, or vice versa..

The DAILY MAIL. You get your news from the Daily Mail. OK, then.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Jeremy Allison - Sam]

Oh, you read it in the Daily Mail ! It *MUST* be true then :-).

See here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eBT6OSr1TI

for details...

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Narcocide]

I dunno... he kinda has a point. You have to change the mindsets of the people before you will ever change their behavior.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Jeremy Allison - Sam]

I just read your message again...

"I just lost all my savings paying my wife's health costs"

Wow. Just, wow. The fact you consider losing all your savings preferable to a National Health Service is, well..., just really *sad*.

I know it's true, because I live here. But I'm always astounded when I'm reminded how Americans have absolutely no concept of what a civilized society really looks like.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[LordLucless]

The British empire was still existant then, but it wasn't "taking about half the countries on the damn planet as colonies"; it's expansion had pretty much halted by 1914.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Jeremy Allison - Sam]

Sure, I can believe as an NHS nurse she had lots of horror stories about how broken the system is. I can tell you lots of horror stories about how broken every company I've ever worked for is :-).

But (and I'm sorry to hear she passed away so you can't ask here) I very much doubt that she would have preferred to impose the US-style system on her patients, had she had experience of both systems.

I live in the US, and I'd pay double my taxes just to get a working NHS over here. Having experience of both systems I know what I'm talking about. It's the peace of mind.

If you've never had it, and only lived in the US system you won't really understand what I'm talking about. It's like trying to describe color (note the spelling there :-) to a blind person. But I'll try.

Imagine just NOT HAVING TO WORRY about healthcare or costs. Seriously - NOT HAVING TO WORRY ABOUT IT AT ALL. Ever. That's what the NHS brings to people's lives.

People over there complain about it, but that's because they also don't understand how truely disfunctional the US system is. They (people in the UK) have no concept of being made bankrupt and homeless by healthcare costs. They just can't imagine it.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[sqrt(2)]

Of course Assange parading around South America thumbing his nose at the US would also be widely celebrated by far the majority of South Americans.

And many of us here in the USA as well.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Grishnakh]

We Americans did it too, long long ago, and it certainly wasn't pretty then either. But yes, the French revolution was pretty nasty too, with all the guillotining and all. Good point about Libya too; they changed their government recently, and look how the losers were treated (Gadafi was hunted down like a dog and shot).

If the Brits storm the Ecuadorian embassy, it'd be funny if Ecuador stormed the British embassy in Quito in return. And maybe a bunch of other governments will storm the British embassies in their countries too.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Esteanil]

I've run out of mod points, so mod parent up.

I'm in the Norwegian system, and we're fairly well covered. I got really really ill 3 years back, you see. Turned out, there were these infections in my brain. 7 of them. And the reason my head hurt was that they were all expanding so fast I was heading into a coma. That's what I was told later, though. The first night:

After being rushed into the ER and immidiately have 5 ER nurses and doctors (not sure how many was which) descend on me the moment I entered the ER, I was sent to a CT scan. She came back out, looked at me, and went back in to take another. Afterwards she told me: "You have had a small brain infarction", and my life ended. I thought.

After 3 days, they sent me to another, bigger, hospital. Because, as I gathered the reasoning was, they could *also* open up my brain to check out the infections, but this other hospital could put me back together afterwards, so that's where I was going.

During the next 5 weeks I am dying from one of the most common causes of my kind, runaway brain infections. As it turns out, after several doctors have taken a break from their vacation to answer important question... In fact, there were doctors all over Norway taking part in my diagnosis from the first night I was in hospital.

3 weeks in they've taken enough MR pictures, and tried enough antibiotics and anti-tuberculosis and... Well. I especially liked the one that made me vomit every time I took it after 30m-2hrs. It made all my bodily fluids completely red. I still feel a little sorry for whoever had to repeatedly clean the bathroom right next to the hospital smoking room after I'd been there... A couple of times it looked like a massacre, and when I tried to rub it off with paper it just smeared.

Suffice to say I was medicated, and to this day am I grateful for stereoids. They literally kept me alive for 5 weeks.

As I was saying, after 3 weeks they had enough MR pictures to program the robot that was to enter my brain, take a sample, and exit. I had to be awake for the brain surgery. One of the reasons is that if my kind gets full anaesthetic there's a 40% chance we never rise again.

They started by bolting a crown to my head. Just a circle, and bolts, all of which were drawn hard enough to stand firm in my cranium.
Then, they started drilling. And I shall remember this feeling until the day I die. The universe was vibrating, and there was a sound that was more than a sound. And that sound was not entirely unlike a dental drill multiplied by... Something nicely logarithmic. I can't really even estimate it.

Then they asked me questions now and again. I was doped to the gills, and mostly was very bored and wanted it to be over... When it was over, they added morphine. Vast amounts of morphine. Unlike all the other patients in the communal waking room, I wasn't sleeping. I was just in gradually^H^H rapidly rising pain.

Later that night, when I was back in my very comfortable single room, I went to the bathroom, and fell partially asleep... This is my morphine-fueled dream:

The interplanetary patent office, due to a severe temporal/causal blunder, has released the iPhone 12 instead of the iPhone 2 (which actually was releasing that day or one of the immidiately surrounding ones). I was holding an iPhone 12. This new model especially had this very interesting function I wanted to test. If you flipped your phone over to the left, it replicated, instantaneously creating a perfect copy of itself that you could lend to a friend. This copy would last for 12 hours. Unfortunately, the phone I'd gotten was bugged, and when I flipped it over to the left it just Made My Head Hurt Really Bad.

All in all, the state spent... I don't know:
Ambulance, 7 km. Air ambulance, 1hr30m. 10 weeks, mostly in solitary room in the most expensive department of the hospital. Infections. The room I slept in part of the time there probably cost many times what my house did.
Unknown number of doctors * unknown number of hours, bu

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[sabri]

Wow. Just, wow. The fact you consider losing all your savings preferable to a National Health Service is, well..., just really *sad*.

Ok, small confession here: it wasn't all that much as I spend most of my hard-earned cash the past 10 months on my newborn daughter.

However, the savings that I still had, went to healthcare. Not because we were not insured, but because this particular benefit stopped at $2000.

I know it's true, because I live here. But I'm always astounded when I'm reminded how Americans have absolutely no concept of what a civilized society really looks like.

Well, first of all I'm not American. I'm from The Netherlands and moved to the U.S. two years ago. Best decision ever. Yes, I pay more for healthcare. But then again, I pay less taxes. And the quality of healthcare here is just.... Astonishing. My wife gave birth to our daughter last year, and she compared the care she received with the care her sister received in The Netherlands (admitted, probably slightly different from the U.K., but still a similar socialistic approach where healthcare is almost for free). I won't bore you with the details (we're getting way off-topic anyway), but once again I was strengthened in my belief that moving here was a good idea.

The concept of what a civilized society really looks like varies per person. I find it very civilized that I am fairly free to say what I think in this country (being the U.S. now), contrary to the U.K. (or The Netherlands, for that matter). I find it very civilized that I am welcomed by my neighbors and colleagues, and my slightly different background is respected, contrary to my previous residence. I can go on and on, but that would get very very off-topic.

To stay on-topic, one of the very few things I find highly uncivilized, is that one country is threatening to invade another country's embassy over something as small as Julian Assange. (again, not saying that I approve of the way the U.S. is handling this, but the U.K. are behaving like morons, too).

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[rtfa-troll]

One of the things which caused the change of the previous British government was it's authoritarian bent and attempts to introduce fascist measures such as identity cards and it's success in introducing automatic extraordinary rendition for British citizens (the US doesn't even have to show real evidence of a crime; just an accusation).

"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which." - animal farm

I guess we can say that anyone who votes for either Labour or Conservative in the next election is responsible, but then we get into the problems of the UK first past the posts system.

This is the kind of total unthinking stupidity which causes real problems in future. Think how many dissidents have been kept in the US embassy in China. Think what would happen if China randomly threatened to revoke the privileges of the US embassy. Mr Cameron should fire his foreign minister for even allowing this suggestion to be made.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Ghaoth]

The French and American revolutions were in a time when people had "the right to bear arms" in order to depose a corrupt government. Try and get enough "people power" to depose a corrupt government in current times - good luck. Under current UN agendas, the world is being disarmed and police states are rampant. The ultimate aim is to bring global government under the auspices of one of the most corrupt organisations in the world - the United Nations.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Zontar The Mindless]

What, are we going to threaten that if they don't cooperate, America will block imports of IKEA's new Trogdör bookshelf?

That's "dörr", friend. :)

More seriously: why would the US block Chinese imports in retaliation for something done by Sweden?

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[hherb]

the brits are basically good people but they have totally lost control over their gov.

same with us in the US.

if you think its so easy to change, you, maybe, can show us ignorant peasants how its done??

This seems to be a common issue permeating across most developed countries. Decent people just wanting to live in peace, raise their kids, and have some fun - and rabidly mad governments out of control brutalizing their citizens on behalf of the multinational corporations and a couple of hegemonial superpowers without any accountability. The lame excuse for "democracy" in those countries is a mere detractor from the fact that they have long become entrenched oligarchies who will destroy any real competition prior to election time.

Last time the establishment was changed in living history was ... when?

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Patch86]

We're in the same position as the US, and most other democracies for that matter. There are three big parties to vote for, and all three have near identical policies. And what differences there are on paper disappear as soon as they're in power. Aside from the main three, you've then got a choice of incoherent extremists (like UKIP, the BNP, or the various Communist variants) or single issue parties (like the Greens or Pirates).

On voting day, it's tricky to see how you use your vote in a way that brings about the right sort of changes. Various combos of votes have been tried over the decades, and nothing's really worked yet...

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[newbie_fantod]

The French and American revolutions were in a time when people had "the right to bear arms" in order to depose a corrupt government.

Neither the French population nor the British Colonials had any right to bear arms at the time they made their revolutions, nor did the Tunisians, Egyptians, Libyans and Yemenis.

I'd say fear of inconvenience and mild discomfort are far more powerful disincentives to revolution than any supposed infringements on Second Amendment rights, at least for societies in which life is comfortable and convenient.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[rainmouse]

Damn, and you were doing so well there for a minute....But then you criticised the NHS (National Health Service, for non-Brits).

Gotta agree on that one. The USA is the laughing stock of the west in regards to healthcare. The fact that they can brainwash their citizens into aggressively defending their morally bankrupt health care system that has many people crushed with anxiety over the mere cost of visiting a doctor and leaves the USA with some of the lowest life expectancy in the western world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[G3ckoG33k]

I'd also have to wonder how many >67 yr olds are commenting on slashdot.

You insensitive clod. Haven't you seen how many references to Unix there are here!

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Znork]

You're thinking of a Sweden that no longer exists (if it ever did). The last decade has seen Sweden handing over people to CIA rendition flights straight to torture, implementing laws they've been told to by the US, etc. The claim has been that there have been trade threats, but frankly I believe it's more about the ambitions of the politicians and civil servants as any trade action would drag the EU into it.

The current generation of Swedish politicians are corrupt cowards and they'll bend over to get a treat.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Znork]

Actually, SAAB isn't anywhere near the biggest industry in Sweden. Volvo (the swedish truck and heavy machinery part, not the ex-Ford now chinese car part) is the largest (by turnover) and Ericsson by stock value. SAAB was very small by comparison even before getting the treatment by GM.

Comparing with California is also a bit unfair as California would have the 9th highest GDP in a world were it a standalone country. The Swedish GDP is, for example, larger than that of North Carolina, Massachusets, Washington, in fact, larger than all but nine of the US states.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[jeremyp]

You can pretty much guarantee that if the Daily Mail says it, it is a lie.

I honestly don't understand the arguments in the USA regarding universal healthcare. This is something I would regard as a basic right. The people against it are effectively saying "poor people? Fuck 'em"

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[FireFury03]

The bit that you're missing is that the GP's "evidence" was from the daily mail - it may as well have been from The Onion for all the truth in it...

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Phrogman]

Or you could say Napoleon took over the government because he could gain control of it when it was in absolute chaos. The French then attempted to spread their version of a society where "Liberty, Equality and Freedom" were the watchwords of the day and there was no room for a Noble Class and a Peasant Class who were dominated by them.
All of the other countries in Europe (dominated by Nobility who still wielded very considerable power) immediately ganged up on the French to destroy this idea that having a Nobility rule over you was morally wrong. The French attempted to expand the territory they control and to introduce a new type of government.

In the process they introduced a detailed and arguably fair legal code (although the English code is preferable IMHO), the metric system, high speed communications (for the time of course: news of a victory in Austria could be in Paris in about 18 hours), they revolutionized the warfare of the time and forcing every other army in Europe to reorganize and revamp their units in reaction.
They attempted to spread a new way of thinking about government and society and to eliminate the class system that dominated all politics at the national level in Europe.

History has been written by the supporters of those Nobles who defeated Napoleon. For 20+ years, he was the most brilliant commander of military forces in Europe, and only seldom was he bested. The rest of the time he often made his enemies look like inept buffoons. He overstepped his reach in Russia of course, but that seems to be a common fate for those who attempt to cross the steppes. Note that the French did better than the Germans in WWII although the results were the same in the end. Napoleon is too easy to caricature and dismiss, and of course since he is French, every American out there will dismiss him out of hand almost automatically - since everything French must be dismissed these days *simply* because the French were unwilling to participate in the Iraq war (which was of course based on lies anyways).

Before anyone asks, no I am not French, don't live in France etc.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Xest]

I'm British and I'm accidently sickened by this news, and I actually think our country deserves international condemnation over this but your rant is just stupid and wrong.

"Before exiting Heathrow Airport, you will be recorded on more CCTV camera's than while driving from San Francisco to New York."

That doesn't even make any sense, the distance between a plane and the exit to Heathrow isn't large enough for this to be true, unless you believe for some reason they have multiple CCTV cameras covering exactly the same spots taking the exact same redundant images for absolutely no reason at all. Hint: they don't. The UK has a CCTV problem, but your example is 100% bullshit, if you'd really actually been to Heathrow you'd know this.

"The UK prohibits MP's of other European countries access because of their political views."

Sure, the UK has refused entry to Geert Wilders, the Dutch far right extremist politicians which is presumably who you're referring to, but that's because the UK was dealing with a resurgent BNP at the time and we frankly didn't want to strengthen the far right platform. You realise however that countries like the US ban even simple holiday makers for jokes they've made on Twitter which the US authorities finds offensive? many European countries also ban extremists and so forth too. Hell, even Canada threatened to refuse me entry once for no other reason than the customs officer was a jackass and "wasn't convinced" I was telling the truth about my life after he'd randomly interrogated me for 3 hours and I've not even got so much as a speeding fine on my record, work a respectable job, and have a decent education. Our country is still one of the more accomodating in this respect, whilst some high profile preaches have been dealt with here and there the UK still for example allows people in supporting groups like "Muslims against crusades" to join in protests with British muslims - something few other countries would tolerate. I don't think the UK really needs to improve much in this area, it's still one of the most tolerant even now, there are much more pressing problems. We do need to make sure we don't allow the downwards trajectory towards less tolerance to continue though and absolutely we should still work to reverse it.

"The health system exceeds Mao's finest expectations when it comes to communist equality for all, especially the lack of quality."

This is just stupid and wrong. The NHS works, it's one of the best systems in the world and used as a model for many other countries who want a progressive health system. If you think the NHS is somehow a communist issue, then presumably you think that the US having public police and fire services makes the US police and fire services communist too. In most civilised nations, healthcare is treated as an essential basic service just like policing, fire, and the military are. Sucks for you if you don't come from such a civilised society where people can focus on being productive, rather than having to worry as to whether they'll be made bankrupt for no other reason than they got ill.

"The school systems is terribly broken."

I somewhat agree with this, it is pretty shit, but relative to the rest of the world it's still in the top 15 or so, so whilst it could do with a lot of improvement, it could also be a fuckton worse.

"The police have a license to kill (remember the poor Brazilian guy in London?)."

Well yeah, the police kinda do have a license to kill. Have you ever heard of an armed police unit anywhere in the world that is told "Well, here are your guns, but don't actually shoot anyone". A few examples of malpractice like Menezes do not equal an endemic issue with police murdering people. The British police record on this sort of thing is orders of magnitude better than in most of the world partly due to the fact a small handful of units have firearms so the scope for it happening accidently, or intentionally, is low. Compare this to say, America, where the police shoot multiple people every

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[LordLucless]

Not so much the "right to bear arms", but the fact that arms technology at that time was cheap enough and simple enough that individuals could own and use them. There is a far, far wider gap today between civilian and military grade equipment. Sure, Americans have the right to bear arms, but the US Government has right to bear carrier groups, remote drones, laser-guided missiles and tank divisions. Even if an individual had the "right" to own those things, there's no practical way they could, and no way they could ever serve as a counterveiling force against the governments own military.

The only way you're winning that sort of fight is if the military itself splits, and some proportion of it backs the uprising.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[jeremyp]

I think the fact that you would rather lose a loved one instead of you life savings is really sad.

The fact that, in the USA, you can be put in the position where you must choose one or the other is a fail of epic proportions.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Xest]

That doesn't mean it doesn't work, it just means it's not the best.

It's still more effective than the vast majority of other systems in the world though arguably including the US' in that we have a longer life expectancy, lower levels of infant mortality, waste less time in our lives dealing with red tape surrounding it, and pay less for it all to boot. Sure other countries do even better again in these sorts of metrics, but the NHS is still right near the top of the scale in terms of global healthcare.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[hattig]

I don't think you understand the concept of "universal healthcare" at all. All you are interested in is yourself. So you earn enough to pay for private healthcare in the US. WHOOPEE! We all know that most people don't earn enough in the US to get the level of treatment you received. And then you used up your savings because *shock horror* the insurance doesn't really cover the costs at all. Yet you think this is great. Incredible reasoning.

Also, you can get private healthcare in the UK if you choose and pay for it. It's not like you are forced to use the NHS.

For what it provides, the NHS is incredibly cost efficient. And it provides a lot. Sadly this won't be the case in a few years because the Conservative government (the LibDem portion of the coalition is so minor, we know who is driving these horrendous changes) over here is intent on fulfilling their 60 year old wet dream of dismantling it and replacing it with costly private mechanisms - that no doubt the MPs and their friends will have their sticky greedy fingers in.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[damienl451]

The rest of the world does just fine with identity cards. I'm still waiting for fascists thugs to knock on my door, or anyone's door for that matter. Even without ID cards, in a modern society, everyone leaves a paper or electronic trail. Unless you're planning on not having a bank account, never getting anything delivered, never attending any school, never going to hospital and not having any kind of insurance, never driving a car, never owning any kind of real estate, never traveling abroad, you can already be found. The widespread opposition to ID cards in the UK, probably a world leader in mass surveillance, and the US, where private companies allow you to know everything about your neighbor, from their political persuasion to any criminal conviction to the value of their home, is unfathomable to the rest of us. Especially considering that people in these countries already have government-issued IDs that serve as de facto ID cards (driver licences, NI/SS cards, etc.).

As for Chinese dissidents, how it usually plays out is that the Chinese let them exit the country, even when the US has already made them leave the embassy. Once these people reach the US embassy, they're already too high-profile to be quietly disappeared and the longer they are allowed to remain in hiding, the greater the risk that they will cause trouble. Better to let them leave for the West and, with the 24-hour media cycle, they'll be out of the spotlight soon. E.g. Chen Guangcheng, who didn't even have to be spirited out of the country. China and the US negotiated and reached an agreement that would make both of them look good. China gets him out of the spotlight, the US get brownie points with pro-democracy activists. Could China have raided the US embassy? Of course. But they're not crazy and realize that they need the US as much as the US needs them and that it'd be nonsense to pick a fight with them. Whether the UK has done so or not in the past won't change that

The idea that a high-profile person such as Assange would be subject to extraordinary rendition while in Sweden is laughable.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[rapiddescent]

oh, CHILL THE FARK OUT.

they can't change their country any more than we can.

we're both fucked.

the brits are basically good people but they have totally lost control over their gov.

well, this has not gone unnoticed within the UK. The very fabric of the UK is at risk because the "Kingdom of Scotland" (one of the united kingdoms) has a growing independence movement; in fact, it has grown so much that Scotland's devolved parliament currently has a majority pro-independence government - something that the UK government had tried to avoid ever happening. The cracks are appearing and the approach that the UK government is taking does not sit well with some cultures within the UK. The Scottish Governament very quite pissed off when it was found that the UK Government allowed redention flights to refuel at Prestwick without telling anyone.

I just wish Wikileaks had more information about the oppresive anti-independence movement that the UK, it's broadcaster and other quasi-governmental organisations are inflicting on Scotland. e.g. the BBC in Scotland shows endless documentaries about why being British is good etc that are not shown anywhere else in the union. See this A to Z of the propaganda that is inflicted on the Scots...

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[asdf7890]

You are right to by cynical, but there is definitely more going on here than just the assault/rape case even if big bad Uncle Sam isn't the driving force.

If it were just because of that case it would have been handled quite differently - there are procedures in place for interviewing the accused here and all those options have been offered but refused: so they want him back there for some reason and the rape does not seem to warrant that determination on its own because at this point (IIRC he hasn't even officially been charged for that crime yet: they are officially just asking him to "help with their enquiries") those procedures should be more than sufficient.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[xenobyte]

The infamous raid on The Pirate Bay shows just how much power the US has over Sweden... They even got the Swedish Attorney General (Justitsminister) to break the constitution and sign a search warrant for the raid, a clear violation of the fundamental separation of powers. She would have been prosecuted for it, but an election changed the government and now suddenly nobody wanted to prosecute?

That it had zero effect on the operation of The Pirate Bay, both short and long term, is another story and shows just how pathetic that action was.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[jeremyp]

During the Falklands-Malvinas War, the US Navy offered to hand over its only non-nuclear super-carrier ship, the Kennedy to the UK

That's the first time I've ever heard of that and I seriously doubt it is true. If nothing else, we had no aeroplanes that could be used on it.

The US did provide us with lots of military hardware like the latest Sidewinder missiles that could acquire targets behind the aircraft they were attached to and they were also pretty relaxed about us taking over their airbase on Ascension. So thanks for all that, but I think you'll find that they have been adequately repaid by Tony Blair allowing himself to be butt-fucked by George W Bush over the Iraq war.

the famous red london buses would wear a white-black swastika in the middle of all that red, to this day .

Britain had staved off the threat of invasion before the USA entered the war.

and the Bismarck would be exhibitied on the Thames as a sanctuary of the Triumphant Will

Bismark was sunk before the USA entered the war.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Yaruar]

Whilst I'm happy that your wife got great care it might be worth noting that contrary to your experience the US actually has a 45% higher infant mortality rate than the Netherlands and one of the worst rates in the developed world.

In the UK very few people have to lose everything they own and get into generations of debt to save a loved one. It's swings and roundabouts really. With universal healthcare everyone is lucky, with private models only the super rich are safe from losing everything from one bad break. I keep thinking about Les Claypool's (of primus fame) brother who is getting hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt just to try to save the life of his baby. That is the reality of the US model...

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Stirling Newberry]

• Sneak and Peek: https://ssd.eff.org/your-computer/govt/sneak-and-peek
• Stop and Frisk http://www.nyclu.org/stopandfrisk
• Warrantless Wiretapping http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/07/federal-appeals-court-says-warrantless-wiretapping-is-legal/
• License Plate Readers http://www.policeone.com/police-products/traffic-enforcement/license-plate-readers/
• Civil Seizure http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20091112/METRO/911120388
• Forfeit without Trial http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/07/megaupload-judge-recusal/
• Extraordinary Rendition http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/rendition701/
• Assassination without trial http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/09/world/middleeast/secret-us-memo-made-legal-case-to-kill-a-citizen.html?pagewanted=all

Many people are laughing all the way to the morgue.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[eam]

It isn't a question of arms. In the U.S., Pennsylvania alone has enough privately held weapons to overthrow the government. It's people that matter. Everyone always brings up the violent overthrow of the government as the next step in the U.S. Despite everything that's wrong with the U.S. (and the U.K., and every other "true democracy"), we don't need an armed rebellion to change things. All we need is the will of the majority of the population.

So, it isn't that we're good people who just can't change the government that is forced on us. We're apathetic people who could change everything at the next election if we cared enough to do it.

Don't deny the guilt of the populace. It bothers me when people say they like Americans, but hate our government. No matter how much it might feel better to deny it, our government is still "of the people and by the people", and if it is no longer "for the people", that's our own fault.

Until we stop pretending we have no power, we never will. We have the power, we just don't have the unified will to use it. If 90% of Americans wrote a letter to their representatives demanding something (disbanding TSA, ending PATRIOT act, patent reform, whatever) it would happen THE VERY NEXT DAY! We just don't care.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[rgbrenner]

but most of the "country-taking" happened in the previous century. The poster was talking about country-taking.

The poster also talked about dividing up the areas...which happened in 1945.

How old would someone alive in 1945 be today

Yes, it's a real mystery.. too bad there's no way of figuring that out.

And btw.. there are over 1.7 million WWII veterans still alive in the US alone. If they were old enough to fight in a war, they were old enough to remember the mess the British (and other empires) created at the end of it.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[rgbrenner]

Right, they weren't "taking countries". However they were " dividing a bunch of them up at random paying no attention to existing tribal lines" which was the SECOND HALF OF THE FIRST SENTENCE.

Please, please.. if you're going to critic my post with details from another post.. read more than the first few words.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[rgbrenner]

The British entered an agreement with the French on dividing up the Middle East after WWI in 1918. So saying they were dismantling it isn't correct.

India, like most of the colonies, did not gain independence until after WWII when the British were bankrupt.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Hatta]

Then why haven't Swedish prosecutors come to the UK to ask Assange questions. Or even asked him questions over the phone? If all they want is questions, why does Assange need to be in Sweden for that?

I await your simple answer to this simple question.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[BasilBrush]

The UK is already looking like some Banana Republic if the law is "flexible" so that embassies can be made inexistent overnight.

It's not a matter of the law being "flexible". That law was created after a policewoman (Yvonne Fletcher) was fatally shot from a window of the Libyan Embassy. The shooter was then untouchable because he was within the embassy. The law was created specifically so that criminal suspects couldn't permanently evade the process of law by sheltering in an embassy.

I would hope that the UK government don't exercise the power this law gives them. IMHO, the alleged offence doesn't warrant it, and isn't even a crime in the UK. But they are not bending the law in any way if they do do it.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Catbeller]

The citizen soldiers didn't affect the American Revolution one way or another. Washington and his regular troops, horribly under-funded by the money-hoarding businessmen, did the heavy lifting and the heavy dying.

But all that would have been for naught but for Ben Franklin in Paris, persuading the French to fund our insurgency under the table. And most importantly, we would have defeated but for the intervention of the French Navy, which engaged the British warships at the very end.

Guys with muskets do not defeat trained armies. We were lucky that the French wanted the British to lose. Else those household guns would have been shoved up the traitors' collective bums before the British hanged them.

Re:Unfortunately, UK has become Uncle Sam's lapdog

[Quasimodem]

In 1945, the British were partitioning India and redrawing the maps in the middle east, the French were experiencing difficulty reestablishing their colony in Vietnam, the Chinese had almost unified their country, and the U. S. was presiding over the four-way split of Berlin; for all of which, I must take full responsibility and profusely apologize, since I was one year old in 1945, and was thoroughly briefed while having my nappies changed. Finally, I also have little difficulty remembering the American man-in-the-street’s responses to the 1981 storming of the United States embassy in Iran, as not just a diplomatic affront, but as a de facto declaration of war. It immeasurably lowered Iran's international reputation and was the assumed reason why America began supplying weapons and Intel to Saddam Hussein on the Iran–Iraq War a year later.

They did just assault the Embassy

[Anonymous Coward]

As of 5:55 PM West Coast Daylight Savings time, they have just invaded the Ecuadorian Embassy.

Assange is bound to end up in the US in a secure facility where he will be denied effective legal representation and be tortured psychologically, if not physically.

The US is no longer the home of freedom. RIP.

Re:They did just assault the Embassy

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.watoday.com.au/opinion/political-news/uk-police-descend-on-assanges-embassy-refuge-20120816-249pe.html

Yep, parent isn't shitting you

LIVE NEWS: They have just invaded the embassy

[CuteSteveJobs]

We haven't seen anything like this since the Iranians invaded the American Embassy in Tehran.

"The British government has told Ecuadorian authorities it believes it can enter its embassy in London and arrest Assange. But any incursion by the Brits at the embassy would be ‘‘without modern precedent’’ and could end up before the international courts, according to an Australian law expert. Professor Donald Rothwell, from Australlian National University College of Law, said the government's stance shows just how serious the UK is about extraditing the WikiLeaks founder to Sweden. "The Ecuadorian Embassy enjoys protection under Article 22 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations which precludes the United Kingdom authorities from entering the Embassy without consent. Assange has enjoyed the protection of the embassy since he sought asylum there on 19 June 2012. "If the United Kingdom revoked the Embassy’s diplomatic protection and entered the Embassy to arrest Assange, Ecuador could rightly view this as a significant violation of international law which may find its way before an international court.”
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/uk-police-raid-assanges-embassy-refuge-20120816-249pe.html

Ecuador should invade the Falkland Islands...

[subreality]

... then hand them over to Argentina. Then send the Brits a diplomatic cable: "Fuck me? Well fuck you too."

The UK specifically said they won't be raiding

[YesIAmAScript]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-19259623

They say they are not about to raid the embassy.

Much like anything else involving Assange, it appears Assange's side is amping up the hype.

Re:The UK specifically said they won't be raiding

[LordLucless]

"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."

They may not do it, but they have threatened to to do it. Might wanna upgrade the AI a bit, script-boy.

Re:Will be really surprised if they storm the plac

[ACS Solver]

There are a few misconceptions that crop up repeatedly. Keep mind though that IANAL.

The diplomat's vehicle isn't sovereign land of the sending country. In fact, neither is the embassy. The Ecuadorian embassy in the UK is still sovereign land of the UK, however, it is inviolable (Article 22 of the Vienna convention). Same article specifies that the vehicles can not be searched. But it's precisely this status of embassies - as opposed to them being sovereign land of the sending state as it's often believed - is, in my reading, what the UK uses to give itself the right to revoke unilaterally that status, under the act cited in the summary.

If the embassy has diplomatic vehicles parked within the premises and not across the street or elsewhere, Assange can get into one of those vehicles, with a diplomat, and drive somewhere, with the police not having the right to detain him. Problem for him is he'd have to get out at the airport or somewhere.

Another comment I saw repeated several times elsewhere is that Ecuador could grant Assange citizenship and diplomat status, making him immune. This is not so - the receiving nation must explicitly agree to acknowledge each member of the mission. Obviously Assange would never be acknowledged as a diplomat by the UK. From my understanding of international law, even if Assange was to become the President of Ecuador, he would still not be enjoying immunity as that applies on official visits of the head of state.

Anyway, his is getting interesting and rapidly heading somewhere. Ecuador is set to announce its decision on asylum in about 12 hours, the UK might be determined to act before then. If they do not, there might be drama around Assange trying to leave the UK. Unless, of course, he just stays holed up there indefinitely.

Don't forget

[Anonymous Coward]

An invitation was even given by the Ecuadorian government to the Swedish prosecutors to come to their embassy and speak with Assange, and they refused to cooperate.

Re:Mess with state department AND Clinton? Bad.

[j00r0m4nc3r]

"I am Clin-ton. As overlord, all will kneel trembling before me and obey my brutal command. End communication."

Re:Sexual assault, huh?

[arth1]

Under Swedish law, it's not their charges to press. It's the public "Ã¥klagare" (prosecutor) who decides whether to press charges in case of sexual assault. The victims are witnesses, not parts.

As for the speculations that Sweden, its police force and prosecutor are somehow involved in a conspiracy to do all this just to hand him over to the US, that's tin foil hat talk. For one thing, this is Sweden, which is not even a NATO country. The ties to the US are not especially strong. And, if the US had wanted him that badly, they would have just picked him up, and not relied on a country that's known for high integrity and isn't even an ally.. It's not like the US hasn't abducted people before.
But more tot he point, both Occam and Freud agrees that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. The simplest explanation is that Sweden wants him extradited so they can, in accordance with their laws, question him. They are not permitted by their own laws to do that outside Sweden, so they need him on Swedish ground.
The UK courts agree with the extradition.

Please, people, take off your tin foil hats and see this for what it is.

Poor Ecuador

[stevez67]

They seem to have stepped in some Assange shyte and can't get the stench off themselves.

Re:Will be really surprised if they storm the plac

[Tough Love]

Ecuador is set to announce its decision on asylum in about 12 hours...

Ecuador has already announced their decision, they will grant asylum. If they were wavering, this idiotic ham handed diplomatic blunder surely tipped the balance.

FALSE -- A few normal cops were allowed in

[artor3]

The source linked by the parent is misleading. The events are being live-tweeted by one James Albury. He has since clarified that:

I wouldnt describe it as a raid. The police entered side door peaceably. I dont think area they are in is sovereign Ecuadorian.

Just regular, everyday police. Not armed or anything and were apparently allowed in by Ecuadorian officials.

Re:Hmnnn

[obeythefist]

Hewlett-Packard makes ammunition? I thought they only made cheap printer ink and sold it in expensive half filled cartridges.

I wouldn't buy ammunition from HP though, it wouldn't work with your gun unless you bought a special chip, and then while the clip looks like it's full, the gun will tell you it's empty half way through so you have to go buy more ammo.

Re:Will be really surprised if they storm the plac

[Rei]

People have tried to move people via diplomatic bags before. It's never worked, at least as far as is known (there's one suspected case from Egypt long ago, but it's not really certain). It failed with Mordechai Ben Masoud Louk, it failed with Umaru Dikko, etc. And it especially wouldn't work if you tried it on something as obviously in violation of the Vienna Convention as a car. The British have already made it quite clear that they plan to stop any vehicles leaving the embassy.

Embassies are not magic. Their immunity basically only extends as far as the host state is willing to tolerate them, because ultimately, the host state has all the cards, including the right to expel diplomats and close embassies altogether. The more the embassy tries to f*** with the laws of the host state and cheat the Vienna Convention, the less they tend to be tolerated. And Ecuador already has a less than stellar record with their diplomatic pouches (they got caught using them to smuggle cocaine to Italy once)

No shit

[A nonymous Coward]

None of the Latin America countries enjoy being reminded of their past colonial status, or the continuing attitude of the US and European imperialists, whether former or not. I imagine if Britain really were so stupid as to storm the Ecuadoran embassy, every single one of their Latin American embassies would be stormed by the people, with the police stepping aside.

There aren't many people anywhere in the world that see this as anything but the UK sucking up to the US. No civilized country has ever stormed an embassy that I can think of, other than the Iranian revolutionaries storming the US embassy, and that was in response to 25 years of living under the Shah who had been forced on them by the US. Does Britain really want to be the first modern civilized country to do something so outrageous, for a somewhat dubious rape charge, as the US's lapdog? I wouldn't be surprised to see the Conservative government fall to a vote of no confidence. I can't imagine too many UK citizens would think this a proper demonstration of national pride.

Re:No shit

[The Rizz]

No civilized country has ever stormed an embassy that I can think of, other than the Iranian revolutionaries storming the US embassy

The Israeli embassy in Egypt was stormed just last year

If you were to RTFA, you would notice that violent protestors stormed the embassy - the Egyptian government, OTOH, sent in soldiers to stop the protestors and protect the foreign embassy. i.e., the exact opposite of what the UK is doing.

UK worse than communists?

[gay358]

During cold war, cardinal Jozsef Mindszenty stayed 15 years in US embassy in Budapest to escape communists. But even communists weren't so evil that they would have violated the Vienna Convention. I hope that UK doesn't prove to be even more evil than communists.

Re:In other news..

[guruevi]

And oil... ~$1Bn/month in oil exports to the US won't phase the US markets one bit... (as a matter of fact they already are, this tidbit of news is causing rising prices)

Re:Don't give the attention whore attention!

[TheGratefulNet]

mod'd informative?? really? what was informative about this guy, trolling, and yet telling others not to troll?

what information did he bring to the table? seriously. why mod him informative?

we get that you are a shill and you are taking the party line against julian. but if you have nothing to offer other than your hate, please take it elsewhere. maybe fox news has a forum more to your liking?

Re:Hypocrisy

[WrecklessSandwich]

Ah, but Assange isn't a sovereign nation. He is not a signatory to the Vienna convention.

The US abandoned the Saigon embassy

[A nonymous Coward]

Says wikipedia about the Saigon embassy: "The Americans and the refugees they flew out were generally allowed to leave without intervention from either the North or South Vietnamese. Pilots of helicopters heading to Tan Son Nhat were aware that PAVN anti-aircraft guns were tracking them, but they refrained from firing. The Hanoi leadership, reckoning that completion of the evacuation would lessen the risk of American intervention, had instructed Dng not to target the airlift itself."

The US abandoned the embassy, and only then did the North Vietnamese invade it. Their actions showed an acute awareness of it being off-limits. Whether they would have invaded it if it had not been abandoned is an alternate universe question.

There's one hell of a lot of tradition behind leaving embassies and ambassadors alone, stretching way back to the middle ages at least.

Re:Slow down there!

[donaggie03]

According to dailymail, this all stems from a letter between the two nations which states "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."

Recorded video feed from outside the embassy

[arnott]

http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/24736941 Taken from http://gregmitchellwriter.blogspot.com/2012/08/will-brits-storm-embassy-for-assange.html.

Live stream of the ebassy storm here....

[Atmanman]

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

and here ...

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

Re:R,e:He REALLY pissed off governments....

[fredprado]

Their diplomatic protection can't be legally lifted without granting them safe passage to Ecuador and that includes Assange if he is given Asylum.

Situation 6) Assange becomes an Australian senator

[solferino]

Situation 6) Ecuador grants Assange asylum, the UK don't carry through their threat of storming the embassy and the situation remains as a stand-off with Assange holed up in the embassy ... until 2013 when an Australian election is due. Assange has already publicly stated that he is considering running for election to the senate next year. He does and is elected easily (as he would need only 14.3% of the population of whatever state he stands in to vote for him - probably Victoria). This escalates the situation to a much higher level - the UK/US/Sweden would now be looking at arresting an elected Australian politician.

Some underreported or widely ignored facts

[Hans Adler]

... which are necessary to understand the situation.

Ecuador has published the precise text of the letter. The key part is: "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." The UK has not denied this letter.

The Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987 was a reaction to the terrorist incident at the Lybian embassy in London in 1984. It's not easy to see how it is relevant from reading its text, but it does allow the UK to revoke diplomatic status of a (then former) embassy - to the extent that it is permitted by international law.

Embassies are not extraterritorial. They are just inviolable - as long as they are embassies. Diplomats are not immune from being arrested (e.g. for drunk driving), just from prosecution. Diplomatic cars are not immune from being stopped by police, just from being searched.

The Ecuadorian embassy in London is not a building but a flat on the ground floor of a larger building. Just google for images. The police can therefore legitimately enter the building (and has done so) without violating international law. This also makes it very hard to smuggle Assange out of the embassy, though maybe revocation of embassy status as necessary for storming the embassy, resulting in unsearchable relocation vans, would make this feasible. Also, it looks as if the physical conditions should make the prolonged presence of Assange in the embassy a nuisance in practical terms.

Ecuador's Response?

[II Xion II]

If the U.K. violates diplomatic protocol, why should Ecuador honor it?

As wrong as it might be, Correa could order the British diplomatic staff to be, essentially, the hostages of Ecuador until he so sees fit as to let them leave. That would leave the U.K. in a very vulnerable position that the press and public would very negatively react towards. The headlines would scream, "U.K. Diplomacy Violation Results in Hostage Crisis" and putting British citizens at risk over a questioning for a "rape case" would probably not go over well with most people.

Of course, that carries risks and bad juju for Ecuador as well and I doubt they would do it, but it would certainly be one way to even the playing field and give the U.K. a very bad black eye where they would otherwise be indefatigable.

Unless those governments don't like the Brits

[SmallFurryCreature]

Argentina has a case to settle with the Brits, who do you think they might support in a conflict?

And England with its economy down the drain certainly doesn't want a boycott against it. Boycotts always benefit someone. Lets say British banks are boycotted from South America. That will benefit South American banks, who will be very appreciative to any South American politicians that initiated such a boycott.

People who think the world always continues just as it was before forgot that the Greeks no longer are the center of civilization and where ever it is now, it sure as hell isn't in Africa. Things change and they always catch the world by surprise.

And another thing -- the middle east

[rgbrenner]

Also.. you have some nerve dismissing colonialism while at the same time bringing up the middle east.

After WWI when the Ottoman Empire collapsed, the Europeans moved in and claimed the area for themselves.. The British and French divided it up under the Sykes–Picot Agreement.

Syria - French
Lebanon - French
Northern Iraq - French
Transjordan - British
Palestine - British
Southern Iraq - British

Then in 1945, they just drew some lines on a map, called them countries, and left the whole region.

Somalia - British colony until 1960
Pakistan - British until 1947
Zimbabwe - British until 1980
Myanmar - British until 1948
Palestine/Israel - British until 1948

You can't just deprive people of managing their own affairs, drain their country of wealth, hold them down under your thumb, and then when they FINALLY get free of your tyranny.. wash your hands of everything you've done and say: look how terrible and violent these people are.

Many of the colonies have serious problems, and the fact that they were colonies was a big part of that.

Re:And another thing -- the middle east

[tubs]

Yes, the British were well known for taking over this liberal democracies and turning them into repressive states. Indeed many of these countries were already beacons of how things should be done, and their liberty and freedom were stolen from them.

A Flash mob of Assange look-alikes

[MrKaos]

just saying...