UK threatens to “assault” Ecuadorian Embassy to arrest Assange

                                        Great Britain has no concern for the civil liberties of it's own citizens, so it will be interesting to see whether or not they go through with this.


*UPDATE 4PM (AEST): TEN police officers have entered the Ecuadorian embassy in London where WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has sought refuge. *

“We want to be very clear, we’re not a British colony. The colonial times are over,” Ecuadorean Foreign Minister Ricardo Patiño said in an angry statement after a meeting with President Rafael Correa.

Ecuador has some guts. Good for them.

This is getting interesting.

BBC: Ecuador grants Wikileaks founder asylum

From the BBC article

the British government is insisting it changes nothing.

They will still seek to arrest him and they will not grant him safe passage. If he steps out, he will be arrested.

As Kelvinf said earlier, this is getting interesting. My guess is that my earlier link was inaccurate, a casualty of the press interest in this standoff.

So why Ecuador, of all places, given that the current government has cracked down press freedom?

The fugitive probably remembered that its leftist government had briefly offered him residency in 2010 at the height of the WikiLeaks furore, though it later backed off.

A stronger argument, though, is the strong anti-American stance of the Ecuadorean government, according to Jean-Jacques Kourliandsky, a Latin America specialist at France’s Insitute of International and Strategic Relations (IRIS).

Ecuador is part of the Bolivarian Alliance, along with Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaraugua and some Caribbean island countries. They are united in their anti-American foreign policies and have been attempting to craft an economic bloc along the lines of the European Union, including a common currency called the sucre (although it doesn’t have a physical existence and only trades electronically)

When reading articles on the BBC re this case, I pay attention to the word “America”. Until now, I haven’t found references from the British government to America.

When people make references to the US, as in the France24 article, I think they kinda support the argument that, this is all about a potential case in America, rather than a rape trial in Sweden.

What I personally don’t get in the argument is why Sweden would send him to the US whereas GB can’t/wouldn’t/hasn’t. :shrug:

Why does it not surprise me that Assad supporters and those who think Vlady Putin is the greatest think since the invention of borscht are also Assange cheerleaders?

I am not sure that the threat of extradition to the US is real. However, that fear seems to be the motivation for why Assange chose the Ecuadorian embassy for refuge.
(NB: that link is two months old)

I’m no fan of Julian Assange, but I think he has done some good. Western governments, including America’s are out of control, and it’s good to see someone make things difficult for them.

Why am I not surprised that Britain would violate international law in raiding the embassy of a nation with which it is not at war? Let’s see them raid the U.S. Embassy for some other reason on another occasion, and see what our country’s reaction will be.

RT is considered a Tabloid and as such commentary

Find another news source

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit