SIGN UP

Why Are We Even Considering Sending Assange To The U S ?

Avatar Image
ToraToraTora | 08:05 Tue 21st Jul 2020 | News
31 Answers
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/julian-assange-extradition-protest-london-wikileaks-parliament-embassy-vivienne-westwood-a9352831.html
I don't give a rats April for Assange but surely we should using him as leverage to get Sacoolas sent back.

Answers

1 to 20 of 31rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
There is no leverage.

America doesn't give up their citizens.
This is the real world, not a John Le Carre novel - they don't swap people on a bridge at midnight.
Question Author
doug: "America doesn't give up their citizens. " apart from the 7 mentioned here?? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK%E2%80%93US_extradition_treaty_of_2003
Question Author
AH, that's in your head, I was merely talking about a deal that cold help us both.
Of course they DO swap people. Maybe not on bridges.
Although not the US and Britain usually to be fair.
I see the point but I don’t think this sort of trading is appropriate. If we think Assange should go he should be sent regardless.
^
It is easy to have that sort of unemotional stance when one is not affected by any decisions made, Ich. I dare say if you were a relative of the deceased Harry Dunn, your attitude would be totally different. If we were to send Assange to the States, what a kick in the teeth that would be for Harry Dunn's parents.
An unemotional stance i feel is a correct one hard as that may be for relatives.
The other way if looking at it is that a stand-off isn’t necessarily going to help matters any more than simply going ahead.
How much does the US really want Assange anyway?
oh god because incredibly we abide by the rule of law
and the extradition treaty is case by case
and NOT
well we have A
and you have B who is littler so swappsies A for B and 1/2 C

how we divide C for later discussion

jesus. and if you knew that , why publicise such rubbish? for all to see
jesus again
// It is easy to have that sort of unemotional stance when one is not affected by any decisions made, Ich.//

I think this sentiment is what led a judge recently to comment possibly maladroitly but yet accurately
'this is not a court of Justice it is a court of the Law of England
-- answer removed --
TTT, my 'bridge at midnight' was tongue in cheek, but seriously, if an 'exchange' was ever done, it would need to be much closer to like-for-like than the individuals you are suggesting here.
I'm not sure the Diplomatic service will be calling you anytime soon, Tora.
Although she is called a 'former CIA operative', it is highly probable that Anne Sacoolas is still a 'spy'.

The USA will not hand her over to a foreign power where she will interrogated 'under oath' about.......anything.

Assange is not a British Citizen and once he has served his time in prison he should be encouraged to go to Ecuador.

The two cases, however much Natural Justice ought to link them together, simply can't be.
// gawd elp us the brains trust has arrived!//

no just a little light dusting of common sense
What happens if we refuse the extradition request from the USA? Answer the next time we request the USA to extradite someone it will be refused.Is it really worth it?
// it is highly probable that Anne Sacoolas is still a 'spy'.

well it seems she was the wife of a spy and that made her according to the agreement a spy as well - wiv all da benefits dat involves.

no wunda TTT becomes inarticulate
and starts name calling ( again )
She held a higher rank than her husband, PP, which was precisely why she was ghosted out of the UK on the hurry-up.
//Although she is called a 'former CIA operative', it is highly probable that Anne Sacoolas is still a 'spy'. //

She may well be or even the wife of a military intelligence officer. I am not sure that the CIA or military personnel are entitled to Diplomatic Priveleges. A US military attache to their embassy in London maybe but surely not this women when it suits. Wasn't that the reason the Americans gave when they whisked her out the UK with indecent haste?
P/P`13.25, People only start name calling when they are losing the argument .

1 to 20 of 31rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Why Are We Even Considering Sending Assange To The U S ?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.