Diplomatic Immunity Is Pointless

What is the point of diplomatic immunity? As far as I can see it's just a way for criminals to get away with criminal activity in another country. Why don't we just do away with it?

This Julian Assange saga is a joke and embarrassment to this country in my opinion. He's not an Ecuadorian national, yet he can hide from the law in the first embassy he stumbles across. How can that be right?

Shouldn't we just storm the embassy and bring him out in handcuffs?

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Shouldn't we just storm the embassy and bring him out in handcuffs?

yes...

I i agree he should be tried for his crimes and punished... a lot!

however...

no, as it would/could be considered an act of war against Ecuador...

Reebok_Rebel wrote:

no, as it would/could be considered an act of war against Ecuador...

But what business is it of the Ecuadorians? He isn't from their country, I could fully understand their stance if he was from their country....as things stand they are simply harbouring a possible sex offender for no reason at all.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Reebok_Rebel wrote:

no, as it would/could be considered an act of war against Ecuador...

But what business is it of the Ecuadorians? He isn't from their country, I could fully understand their stance if he was from their country....as things stand they are simply harbouring a possible sex offender for no reason at all.

It boils down to diplomacy and bureaucracy...

an embassy is considered (to an extent) to be that countries soil, thus its 'part' of that country.

its only a matter of time before Saudi Arabian children are having hands cut off for stealing penny sweets or men are having acid squirted in there eyes for looking at sombodys wife in the saudi embassy...

Reebok_Rebel wrote:

an embassy is considered (to an extent) to be that countries soil, thus its 'part' of that country.

No it isn't, we should just go in and arrest the fool

Lofty_Love wrote:

Reebok_Rebel wrote:

an embassy is considered (to an extent) to be that countries soil, thus its 'part' of that country.

No it isn't, we should just go in and arrest the fool

A permanent diplomatic mission is typically known as an embassy, and the person in charge of the mission is known as an ambassador.
The term "embassy" is often used to refer to the building or compound
housing an ambassador's offices and staff. Technically, however,
"embassy" refers to the diplomatic delegation itself, while the office
building in which they work is known as a chancery.

Ambassadors can reside within or outside of the chancery; for
example, American diplomatic missions maintain separate housing for
their ambassadors apart from their embassies. Ambassadors residing
outside of the chancery retain special protection from the host
country's security forces and the ambassadorial residences enjoy the
same rights as missions. Like embassies, such residences are considered
inviolable and, in most cases, extraterritorial. The residences of high commissioner, who are similar to ambassadors, have the same rights.
Extraterritoriality is the state of being exempt from the jurisdiction
of local law, usually as the result of diplomatic negotiations.
Extraterritoriality can also be applied to physical places, such as military bases
of foreign countries, or offices of the United Nations.

Having exemption from the law of the host nation isn't the same as being on different soil.

As the host nation we can remove the power of the embassy and thus enter it, Ministers have the power to revoke an embassy's status where the mission is not being used for a proper purpose connected to diplomacy.


the only reason we arn't is because this thing has exploded onto the worldwide media and it might make us look 'nasty'

If we did that though we leave our diplomats in other countries open to the same treatment. This whole wiki leaks situation is a joke imo. The guy has done nothing wrong.

I don't know much about all the wiki leaks buisness, but he has been accused of rape, so he should be arrested.

If hes done nothing wrong then what is he scared of?

He's scared of getting arrested for stuff he hasn't done. The rape allegation is a joke if you look into it. They're desperate to get him for something.

Well then he won't be convicted, its Sweden and the US who are after him, not Somalia or Zimbabwe.

He will have a proper trial, with a very good lawyer and a educated/not bribed jury.

So if he has done nothing, he has no need to hide.

Do you honestly believe that? After the wiki leaks stuff the US are desperate to get him. That's why this rape allegation was suddenly made. It's load of shit imho. The Americans are not to be trusted.

So your just making assumptions based on a conspiracy theory.


'A load of shit' will be identified in court as, a load of shit.

It's not assumptions though. Have you looked into wiki leaks or the rape allegation at all? It's pretty shocking stuff tbh. It's not just me that has major doubts about what is really going on here.

Lofty_Love wrote:I don't know much about all the wiki leaks buisness, but he has been accused of rape, so he should be arrested.

If hes done nothing wrong then what is he scared of?

THIS is the $million question...

I actually find it pretty funny that this guy would 'leak' nuclear secrets or other sensitive information to the world wide web...

yet, would like the FBI to stop investigating him...

gobshite...

"If Bradley Manning did as he is
accused, he is a hero and an example to all of us and one of the world's
foremost political prisoners," Assange said.

Assange fears that if he were
extradited to Sweden, he would immediately be extradited to the United
States, which has condemned WikiLeaks' publication of classified
documents. Assange and his supporters say the U.S. would charge him with
espionage; the U.S. has not said whether or not it would pursue charges
against him.

The foreign minister said that
Ecuador asked Sweden to promise it would not extradite Assange to the
United States, but Sweden refused.


^^^


get the SAS in there, send the twat to Sweden and then let the US shoot him.

Bernard Dennis Park wrote:It's not assumptions though. Have you looked into wiki leaks or the rape allegation at all? It's pretty shocking stuff tbh. It's not just me that has major doubts about what is really going on here.

Ive looked a bit into the rape allegations and I know what Wiki Leaks is (couldn't reel of a list of things they have uncovered though)

But I don't see how this is relevant, to be honest the rape allegation seems pretty valid, even his lawyers have admitted perhaps 'boundaries were pushed' but are trying to say it wasn't clear rape.

Are you suggesting he should be let free because you think he probably didn't do it?

Why is it so inconceivable that he may have raped someone?

I think The New York Times, or some other big US paper, printed some of the things on wikileaks. Yet they're not in trouble. All Assange did was allow others to post on his website. He's not hacked into anywhere or stolen any top secret information. If I knew something and posted it on here should Sluffy get extradited to America for it?

I dont understand why his wikileaks site cant 'leak' something about him... or is he the only person in the world whose immune to it?

more of the guardian report... he sounds like a right childish git running to his daddy...

On Sunday, Assange claimed that
he heard police enter the embassy the night after he had been granted
asylum. "Inside this embassy after dark, I could hear teams of police
swarming up into the building through its internal fire escape," Assange
said. "But I knew there would be witnesses."

In 2010, Swedish prosecutors in
Stockholm issued warrants to question Assange about alleged sex crimes
involving a pair of former WikiLeaks volunteers. Assange claims the
charges are part of an international smear campaign stemming from
WikiLeaks' publication of diplomatic cables.

After a brief international
manhunt, Assange turned himself in to London police in December 2010. He
was granted bail and placed under house arrest. After Assange's appeals
to fight his extradition to Sweden were denied, he fled to the
Ecuadorean Embassy.