A question for Aussies:

[Dr. Arthur Trollingson]

Should I disregard this source, or is this a one off?

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/pol...816-249pe.html

Unlike every other news outlet on the planet tonight, these guys went with a sensational headline and first paragraph that implies a conclusion that doesn't jive with reality. Is that normal?

[The Bigfella]

The Age is a remnant rump of a once decent news outlet. They've lost the plot in the last 10 years

The photo shows that the headline is justified though.... a couple of police vans at the door.

[seanz]

Australian media is beyond reproach, you just ask them.

[PeterSibley]

This part of the story is right,
"What the US wants, the US gets from its allies, regardless of if it's legal or if it's ethical or in breach of human or legal rights," Ms Assange told AAP.

[Dr. Arthur Trollingson]

The Age is a remnant rump of a once decent news outlet. They've lost the plot in the last 10 years

The photo shows that the headline is justified though.... a couple of police vans at the door.

Thanks for the note on The Age, I'll remember that.

But really? Justified? The headline makes it sound like the police stormed the embassy. They're just hanging around outside. It's misleading and overly sensational to say they've "descended on Assange's embassy refuge" when the reality is they're still respecting the embassy as sovereign soil, and haven't gone past the lobby.

A more accurate headline would be something like: Britain has threatened to revoke Ecuador's diplomatic status if Assange is granted immunity; no decision yet.

That's pretty much the headline everyone else ran.

[Peerie Maa]

Thanks for the note on The Age, I'll remember that.

But really? Justified? The headline makes it sound like the police stormed the embassy. They're just hanging around outside. It's misleading and overly sensational to say they've "descended on Assange's embassy refuge" when the reality is they're still respecting the embassy as sovereign soil, and haven't gone past the lobby.

A more accurate headline would be something like: Britain has threatened to revoke Ecuador's diplomatic status if Assange is granted immunity; no decision yet.

That's pretty much the headline everyone else ran.

It wasn't even as final? as that. Since a Libyan in their embassy murdered a police officer from an Embassy window we have a law on our statute that allows us to enter an embassy in pursuit of a felon. A one off activity of limited duration. It is unlikely whether it will be invoked though for fear of creating precedent.

[Uncle Duke]

It wasn't even as final? as that. Since a Libyan in their embassy murdered a police officer from an Embassy window we have a law on our statute that allows us to enter an embassy in pursuit of a felon. A one off activity of limited duration. It is unlikely whether it will be invoked though for fear of creating precedent.

In this case, of course, Assange has not even been charged with a crime. He is merely wanted for questioning. In Sweden.

[Peerie Maa]

In this case, of course, Assange has not even been charged with a crime. He is merely wanted for questioning. In Sweden.

Dunno, Is skipping bail a felony, contempt of court or something?

[Dr. Arthur Trollingson]

It wasn't even as final? as that. Since a Libyan in their embassy murdered a police officer from an Embassy window we have a law on our statute that allows us to enter an embassy in pursuit of a felon. A one off activity of limited duration. It is unlikely whether it will be invoked though for fear of creating precedent.

Here's what the BBC is saying:

The UK Foreign Office had warned, in a note, that it could lift the embassy's diplomatic status to fulfil a "legal obligation" to extradite the 41-year-old by using the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987.

That allows the UK to revoke the diplomatic status of an embassy on UK soil, which would potentially allow police to enter the building to arrest Mr Assange for breaching the terms of his bail.

Here's the relevant section of the act:

PART I DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR PREMISES

1 Acquisition and loss by land of diplomatic or consular status.

(3)In no case is land to be regarded as a State’s diplomatic or consular premises for the purposes of any enactment or rule of law unless it has been so accepted or the Secretary of State has given that State consent under this section in relation to it; and if—
(a)a State ceases to use land for the purposes of its mission or exclusively for the purposes of a consular post; or
(b)the Secretary of State withdraws his acceptance or consent in relation to land,
it thereupon ceases to be diplomatic or consular premises for the purposes of all enactments and rules of law.

So I guess the relevant question isn't whether Assange is a criminal, rather it's a question of whether granting a foreign national asylum in an embassy is within the scope of an embassy's rightful mission.

[Peerie Maa]

So I guess the relevant question isn't whether Assange is a criminal, rather it's a question of whether granting a foreign national asylum in an embassy is within the scope of an embassy's rightful mission.

Assange has breached bail, for which he is liable to a custodial sentence. Furthermore he has taken his appeal against extradition to Sweden right the way through all levels of appeal, so the UK is now obliged under International treaty to make every effort to extradite him to Sweden. As I said the FO is in two minds as to whether they would be wise to play hard ball with Ecuador, so they may simply wait for Assange to break cover. I cannot see how the Ecuadorians will be able to move him, but we will see.

[WX]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19281492

Ecuador has granted asylum to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange two months after he took refuge in its London embassy while fighting extradition from the UK.
It said his human rights might be violated if he is sent to Sweden to be questioned over sex assault claims.
Foreign Secretary William Hague said the UK would not allow Mr Assange safe passage out of the country and the move was also criticised by Stockholm.
Ecuador said it would seek to negotiate arrangements for Mr Assange to leave.

[Dr. Arthur Trollingson]

As I said the FO is in two minds as to whether they would be wise to play hard ball with Ecuador, so they may simply wait for Assange to break cover. I cannot see how the Ecuadorians will be able to move him, but we will see.

I'm thinking he's going to have to wait in the embassy until someone invents a jetpack so he can fly out of the country without setting foot on British soil.

[Gerarddm]

He'd still be in Brit airspace....

He may be there in the Ecudaoran embassy quite some time.