Assange....Nightmare house guest

viv1969 said:
He's suing the embassy that's harboured him.
Click to expand...

Hi is suing for breach of human rights as they have changed the rules in the embassy and he is very nearly in solitary confinement. Wether you support him or not as an individual, this is not OK to do with someone you have offered sanctuary to. If they no longer wish to house him they should deal with that in an open way, not use psychological warfare to break an individual. The embassy created this bit of the situation in the first place, so brought this on themselves.

The embassy has changed the rules for housing him - his internet connection was removed totally for some time, he is no longer permitted to make political statements of any kind (removal of freedom of speech), his contact with anyone outside of the embassy is restricted - visitors have to be acceptable to the embassy and they have to give 3 day notice of any visit. Also they have to give all their personal phone numbers, facebook pages and other personal details to the embassy, which is an excessive personal intrusion. The embassy is removing all sorts of other support as well.

If they are having to tell him to clean the place up and care for the cat, I suspect he is suffering from severe depression.

He is stuck with high level personal freedom restrictions and does not have the rights of prisoners in jail. At this point, he has never been found guilty of any crime by a court of law, so is still legally innocent.

I wish the UK had negotiated this situation better, shipped him off to another country under diplomatic protection so we could maintain our general stance against death penalty etc and got the UK out of this once the Dutch decided not to pursue the situation. I think the Dutch could have handled things better too.

I think of all the money wasted on this for years and years and the police time, which could all be going to better use.
 
Last edited:
If he’s innocent, why has been hiding there all this time?
He should man up and face the music
 
MidnightUK said:
Hi is suing for breach of human rights as they have changed the rules in the embassy and he is very nearly in solitary confinement. Wether you support him or not as an individual, this is not OK to do with someone you have offered sanctuary to. If they no longer wish to house him they should deal with that in an open way, not use psychological warfare to break an individual. The embassy created this bit of the situation in the first place, so brought this on themselves.

The embassy has changed the rules for housing him - his internet connection was removed totally for some time, he is no longer permitted to make political statements of any kind (removal of freedom of speech), his contact with anyone outside of the embassy is restricted - visitors have to be acceptable to the embassy and they have to give 3 day notice of any visit. Also they have to give all their personal phone numbers, facebook pages and other personal details to the embassy, which is an excessive personal intrusion. The embassy is removing all sorts of other support as well.

If they are having to tell him to clean the place up and care for the cat, I suspect he is suffering from severe depression.

He is stuck with high level personal freedom restrictions and does not have the rights of prisoners in jail. At this point, he has never been found guilty of any crime by a court of law, so is still legally innocent.

I wish the UK had negotiated this situation better, shipped him off to another country under diplomatic protection so we could maintain our general stance against death penalty etc and got the UK out of this once the Dutch decided not to pursue the situation. I think the Dutch could have handled things better too.

I think of all the money wasted on this for years and years and the police time, which could all be going to better use.
Click to expand...
He is not stuck with any personal freedom restrictions of any kind. He is free to leave at any time.
Any woes he is "suffering" are entirely of his own making.
 
TCR4x4 said:
If he’s innocent, why has been hiding there all this time?
He should man up and face the music
Click to expand...


The only thing he is "guilty" of is breach of bail, which applied to the original charges brought by the Swedish judiciary, relating to a possible change in their law. The case fell apart in Sweden, and the charges against him have been dropped. This means that in the eyes of the law he is innocent of that offence, which them means that the bail was based on something which he always maintained he was innocent of.
I believe that he is justified in being afraid of deportation to the US, because once there, they could ship him out to Guantanamo, which is outside the juridiction of US law - the whole point of its existence.
Some US politicians want to see him executed.
I also think that his ego does him no favours, and his sense of entitlement comes across as high handed arrogance.
 
viv1969 said:
He is not stuck with any personal freedom restrictions of any kind. He is free to leave at any time.
Any woes he is "suffering" are entirely of his own making.
Click to expand...

Quite right. It is his choice to be there, if he doesnt like it he can go. If someone stays in my house they follow my rules.
 
Assange is not free to leave at any time, as it could lead directly to his death.

“The UK Government refuses to confirm or deny whether there is an extradition request or give an assurance against extradition, which means we cannot be confident he can walk out of the embassy without being arrested and extradited to the US.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-leave-us-extradition-wikileaks-a8199771.html

Personally given this is such a long running high profile case, I do not see how our UK government can see withholding this information from both Assange and the UK public it represents as acceptable behaviour. Not making a defined statement is also costing the public huge amounts of money in relation to guarding the embassy.


Westminster Magistrates’ court upheld the UK arrest warrant, saying despite the fact that rape and sexual assault charges Mr Assange was originally wanted for in Sweden had now been dropped, he was still wanted for refusing to surrender to bail “without reasonable cause”, which is a criminal offence. Mr Assange has frequently said he would happily face British and Swedish justice if he is given a guarantee he will not be extradited to the United States. This demand has never been overtly agreed to by the UK. It is unclear how strong the appetite to prosecute Mr Assange is in America. In the past, his organisation has been a source of deeply embarrassing revelations for the US. But Wikileaks’ recent activity has benefited the current administration – including the leak of Hillary Clinton’s campaign emails obtained by Russian-backed hackers. But since then the tone has changed. Last year US Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Mr Assange’s arrest was a “priority”, while CIA director Mike Pompeo said: “It’s time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is: a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia.” Despite the strong words, there remains no public criminal case against either Mr Assange or his organisation.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-leave-us-extradition-wikileaks-a8199771.html


In regard to the poor treatment of anyone seeking to visit Assange

"... government of Ecuador refused a visit by Human Rights Watch general counsel Dinah PoKempner, who has likened Ecuador’s isolation to “solitary confinement”, and had not allowed several meetings with his lawyers. A statement said: “Ecuador’s measures against Julian Assange have been widely condemned by the human rights community.... Mr Assange’s lawyers said they were also challenging the legality of the Ecuadorian government’s “special protocol”, which makes his political asylum contingent on “censoring” his freedom of opinion, speech and association. The protocol also requires journalists, his lawyers and anyone else seeking to see Julian Assange to disclose private or political details, such as their social media usernames and the serial numbers and codes of their phones and tablets, with Ecuador – which the protocol says the government may “share with other agencies. The protocol claims the embassy may seize the property of Mr Assange or his visitors and, without a warrant, hand it over to UK authorities, said the statement.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...t-sues-wikileaks-london-embassy-a8592201.html


"To keep access to the internet, he has been told to refrain from activities “that could prejudice Ecuador’s good relations with other states”, the nine-page document said. The embassy cut off the transparency activist’s internet in March, saying he was potentially harming its diplomatic ties with Britain and other EU member states, after Mr Assange challenged Britain’s claim that Russia had carried out a nerve agent attack in Salisbury. It also severed his telephone communications and restricted his visitors to members of his legal team. Under the new rules, diplomatic staff must formally approve all of Mr Assange’s visitors three days in advance. He and his guests are banned from using “unauthorised equipment” in the building, the memo written in Spanish and published on the Ecuadorian Código Vidrio website said. The embassy retains “the right to authorise security personnel to seize equipment” or ask British authorities to do the same, it said.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...cat-internet-politics-wikileaks-a8585886.html


I find it interesting that Ecuador seem to be blaming Assange for the consequences of Ecuadors own actions and decisions. No one made them give him sanctuary. They knew it was controversial at the time. Now they are whining about the consequences and behaving very badly towards innocent people - his visitors and lawyers being innocent people who have never been charged with anything and who indeed represent facets of our UK law.

Some attending Assange will be people who are just doing a job their employer has sent them to the embassy to do (lawyers, journalists, medical staff etc) - who are now seemingly being harassed by the embassy and having their privacy invaded just for doing their jobs. Why does the embassy think it can direct our UK security services to start confiscating peoples private goods on the demand of the embassy, if the report in the Independent is correct? How does this impact on the freedom of the press and confidentiality, or is journalism (and Public Interest) now totally banned from contact with Assange?


In many ways, this is almost not about Assange at all, but about how the UK is perceived and who we want to be ethically and morally.
I don't feel we are looking very good at the moment over the above issues.
 
Last edited:
TCR4x4 said:
If he’s innocent, why has been hiding there all this time?
Click to expand...

viv1969 said:
He is not stuck with any personal freedom restrictions of any kind. He is free to leave at any time.
Click to expand...

cambsno said:
Quite right. It is his choice to be there, if he doesnt like it he can go. If someone stays in my house they follow my rules.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should read around a bit more before making these statements. Please see my comment directly above this one. Also, the new rules impact on totally innocent vistors, many just doing thier job - but they have to reveal all of thier political details and give all sorts of private info to a foreign government to be allowed to speak with Assange, which then declares all this info will be passed on to other un-named security forces.

This whole 'new rules' senario also brings into question the shadowy relationship between the Embassy and the UK Government / UK security forces
 
Last edited:
Assange had his internet withdrawn because part of his deal with the Ecuador Embassey was not to embaressthem and not to interfere with other countries. The final straw was his unfounded challenge that the russians weren't responsible for the Salisbury poisoning.

He has also been caught swapping data via usb stick, with Farage for starters, was involved with the russians and team trump over the US election interfering. As such it wouldn't surprise me if theres an extradition document to send hi to the US to answer charges there. He thought he was untouchable and is paying the price.
 
no idea why they offered him sanctuary in the first place.
ah well its "non news" in my eyes if he wants to waste the years off his life in self imposed exile
so be it
 
MidnightUK said:
Perhaps you should read around a bit more before making these statements. Please see my comment directly above this one. Also, the new rules impact on totally innocent vistors, many just doing thier job - but they have to reveal all of thier political details and give all sorts of private info to a foreign government to be allowed to speak with Assange, which then declares all this info will be passed on to other un-named security forces.

This whole 'new rules' senario also brings into question the shadowy relationship between the Embassy and the UK Government / UK security forces
Click to expand...

He is there by choice.. if he doesn’t like how he is being treated, leave.. how hard is that to understand.
 
He has cost them £40,000 a month as they have had to have private security contractors guarding him and monitoring him, plus vetting, frisking, and recording all visitors to him.
They have had to have extensive CCTV and audio systems installed throughout the embassy to monitor Assange's erratic behaviour and activities, which included trying to snoop on embassy documents.
The embassy has had to rent a flat in the next block to house these security contractors at a cost of £2800 a month for the rent of the flat.

He has hacked their own embassy servers and intranet so he could read their internal notes and emails on him, so now they have to keep any information on him locked in a safe.
Because of this and his interfering with other countries, theycut off his internet access, and installed a cellular jammer to stop him reading his emails or accessing the internet using a mobile phone.

The embassy is tiny, and is effectively just a section of the ground floor of the apartment building. Assange was just given one room to live in at the start. Now he has taken over around 1/3 of the entire embassy and put locks on some of the doors to rooms that only he has the code for.
He holds face to face conversations with secret visitors in the ladies toilet for hours on end as he thinks this is the only room which isn't bugged.

Then there's his personal hygiene problem... and her has a cat that messes everywhere, including in their copier
 
Last edited:
MidnightUK said:
Assange is not free to leave at any time, as it could lead directly to his death.
Click to expand...
As I understand things, the UK will not agree to extradite anyone to a country with the death penalty unless there is an assurance that the death penalty will not be used.
 
Mr Bump said:
no idea why they offered him sanctuary in the first place.
ah well its "non news" in my eyes if he wants to waste the years off his life in self imposed exile
so be it
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree, "non news" - same as the infinitely tedious McCann palaver.
 
MidnightUK said:
Perhaps you should read around a bit more before making these statements. Please see my comment directly above this one. Also, the new rules impact on totally innocent vistors, many just doing thier job - but they have to reveal all of thier political details and give all sorts of private info to a foreign government to be allowed to speak with Assange, which then declares all this info will be passed on to other un-named security forces.

This whole 'new rules' senario also brings into question the shadowy relationship between the Embassy and the UK Government / UK security forces
Click to expand...

I don't need to read further, thanks.
Whatever he's having to "endure" is 100% by his own choice. That is a simple truth.
He is not a prisoner.
If he isn't happy with ANY rule imposed upon him within the Equadorian embassy, he is free to pack his bags and leave.
The same goes for those who would complain about the hoops needed to jump through in order to visit Assange. If they're not happy with the requirements, they don't have to visit him.
 
TCR4x4 said:
He is there by choice.. if he doesn’t like how he is being treated, leave.. how hard is that to understand.
Click to expand...
I'm guessing you've just ignored the posts by @MidnightUK then, you know, the bit about the very real chance that the good ole USofA may very well ask for his extradition. Considering that, I doubt it really is his choice to be locked inside that embassy. Personally I think the mans a narcissist, but I wouldn't wish Trumps America on him.
 
jakeblu said:
I'm guessing you've just ignored the posts by @MidnightUK then, you know, the bit about the very real chance that the good ole USofA may very well ask for his extradition. Considering that, I doubt it really is his choice to be locked inside that embassy. Personally I think the mans a narcissist, but I wouldn't wish Trumps America on him.
Click to expand...

It’s fully his choice to be there. The US won’t execute him, even if they do, he deserves it. He made his bed, he should lie in it, and not inside an embassy.
 
TCR4x4 said:
If that’s what a jury decides in a location where it’s legal, yes. He ain’t exactly an angel is he.
Click to expand...

TCR4x4 said:
It’s fully his choice to be there. The US won’t execute him, even if they do, he deserves it. He made his bed, he should lie in it, and not inside an embassy.
Click to expand...

That must be among the most daftest of things ever posted on here!
 
A man is hiding in a embassy because he fears he could be extradited and executed..
Now it may just be me, but your normal everyday person doesn’t get extradited by the UK to the USA to wherever and then Executed without some pretty hefty legal proceedings.
He must be guilty as sin if he truely believe this is going to happen to him

He’s already escaped rape charges in Sweden as he has hidden so long... if he was innocent, he wouldn’t be doing this. He knows he is guilty of something pretty heavy..
As I said, he made his bed...

But I guess it easier just to say, oh poor you without internet and getting your visitors vetted. Fully his choice to be there, I have no sympathy whatsoever.
 
simon ess said:
I've lost track

What did he do that could, theoretically, get him executed, or even extradited to the U.S?
Click to expand...

He leaked some documents that made the USA lot look very stupid, plus some military documents too. If the usa have their way they will get him as when the americans say do this do that, then everyone has to do as their told.
 
Quite ironic that people defend him. When a company has a data breach it is punishable in many cases yet WikiLeaks has violated the personal privacy of individuals. Like medical info, credit card numbers etc... Imagine the outcry if Amazon leaked payment information???
 
cambsno said:
Quite ironic that people defend him. When a company has a data breach it is punishable in many cases yet WikiLeaks has violated the personal privacy of individuals. Like medical info, credit card numbers etc... Imagine the outcry if Amazon leaked payment information???
Click to expand...

This^ and worse...

It’s difficult for some of us, like finding the bird we fancied at school for her free thinking and liberal attitudes snogging the school bully. Personal politics are complicated and it’s frustrating that the bloke we thought was standing up for the little guy is actually an egomaniac who will get into bed with anyone to make himself look big and clever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top