Atlantis wrote:Alleging that Snowden is a Russian puppet without providing any evidence or alleging that Assange is a rapist before he is condemned are classical methods of character assassination to discredit dissidents.
The arrest of Assange demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt that Russia is the only safe place for Snowden and Assange's extradition to the US will show that the rape allegations cannot be substantiated.
Because, for ASSANGE, these 'alleged' claims against him, are a pretext device, in which to pursue his extradition by political channels of power abuse.
It's been claimed that America's extradition claim on ASSANGE should take precedence over Sweden's, because America made that claim first, once he was arrested.
That is B$, it's going to be a political decision, by an administration, that is, as ASSANGE's mother stated, in deep **** & that is typically the course that all Tory government's adapt when in the deep.
Sweden should have the first claim & ASSANGE should claim asylum in that country.
If that's not possible, he should claim Habeus Corpus through his lawyer, he would be brought to court & the legaility or otherwise of his detention be decided on by the courts of justice.
In my opinion, a jumping of bail' is not justification of holding a person against his will.
In effect, he would be in 'protection' of the court, once a claim for HC is made
As an asylum seeker, he is in no way any different than the monarch is in respect of the law, assuming that is his status, it would be against the law to hold him, when the act to deprive him of refuge by the Ecuadoran government took place, they, literally deprived him of his 'protected' status as a seeker of asylum.
Despite his fears of extradition to America by Sweden, that risk is far greater in the U.K under a 'Tory' gov't, or a 'Blairite' Labour one.