On 12/12/2016 13:02, Judith wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 21:30:09 +1100, F Murtz <
hag...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> John wrote:
>>> "The Todal" wrote
>>>
>>>> Prepared and published in November last. An interesting read. I don't know
>>>> whom it's aimed at, and it hasn't had very much publicity.
>>>>
>>>>
https://justice4assange.com/IMG/Ihtml/assange-statement-2016.html
>>>
>>> I saw it about a week (or so) ago.
>>>
>>> John.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Definitely guilty according to many posters to this group who seem to
>> know all about it.
>
> I guess you mean the American Government - I fully agree.
>
> If you don't - perhaps you could explain further.
>
> "With appropriate diplomatic pressure, these governments may cooperate in
> bringing Assange to justice. But if they refuse, the United States can arrest
> Assange on their territory without their knowledge or approval."
> Legal advice from the US Department of Justice.
That, apparently, was legal advice dating from 1989 which of course
pre-dated the Assange situation. I think Assange is now trying to make
the journalist Mark Thiessen a spokesman for the US government, which
obviously he isn't.
It's certainly an interesting piece of legal advice, though.
https://fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fbi/olc_override.pdf
Long and complex though it is, I think the true meaning is that a US
court won't throw out a prosecution based on the argument that the
defendant was apprehended in a foreign country in circumstances that
violated the laws of that country.
>
> So if they wanted to they can come to say the UK and arrest someone without the
> Government's knowledge or approval. That's nice.
>
It seems to me that this is basically what "extraordinary rendition" is,
ie a process of kidnapping people and taking them either to the USA or
to another friendly country where they can be tortured.
The problem being that the UK has in the past colluded with the USA in
this process and the people involved have not been held to account.
Israel has kidnapped people from foreign countries in order to put them
on trial in Israel. Adolf Eichmann is the obvious example. Mordechai
Vanunu a more recent example.
If Assange genuinely believes that the USA could seize him from the
streets of the UK or Sweden, then obviously any reassurances from those
governments must be valueless. So what's his point? That Sweden should
abandon its attempts to extradite him and the UK should allow him to
leave the embassy without being arrested, all so that the CIA can creep
up on him in any London street and fly him to America?