Loudmouth,

Yep, mate, done and dusted....you're legend in your own mind. (even if you persist in erroneously declaring he has "charges" to face in Sweden)

Congrats on that : )

Actually, I just popped in from the patch for a cuppa, and reading your self-proclaimed victory made me smile.

Our two retired chooks, Ada and Elsie have the freedom of the back garden for the time being, and they like to cackle away at me from the other side of the vegie patch fence....reminiscent somehow of my experience on this thread,....

.....except they're more humble.

Cheers

: )

Hi Poirot,

Yes, you're right, it's hard to be humble when one is correct in one's assessment.

If you have anything to add which actually relates to the issues, rather than to my modesty or otherwise - and I do mean something other than nit-picking over whether Assange has been charged or, as you imply, has merely been invited to be questioned - then I am sure there are many of us out here waiting for your clarifications.

Has the US laid charges yet ? No.

Has Sweden indicated that they will hand him straight over to the US ? No.

Has the UK indicated that they will - perfidious Albion ! - find some way that they haven't yet to hand him over to the US ? No.

Will all of this strengthen friendly ties between some South American countries and the UK, Sweden or the European Union ? Probably not.

Will Ecuador's craven and unprincipled opportunism divert attention from its own problems at home ? Probably not.

And of course, the most relevant question: should a Hero of the People be allowed to abuse female supporters ? You may say yes, but I mkodestly think 'no'.

And if they complain, do they immediately become puppets of the US in the minds of the opportunist Left, or are they still their own persons, standing up for themselves at the risk of losing 'friends' on the faux-Left ? We may differ in our answers here too.

Sorry for the negativity :)

Over to you, Poirot, when you can spare the time in a 16-hour work-day looking after two chooks.

Hi Poirot,

Sorry to hear about your laryngitis.

The brave and principled President of Ecuador is reported today as saying that, in South Americam countries, what Assange is alleged to have done is not a crime: it's not a crime not to wear a condom - of course, the right of a woman to have any say is neither here nor there, in such macho countries.

So to hell with Swedish law: let's have a sort of mock trial here, Poirot: should Assange have worn a condom, as his partner asked him to ? Does her opinion matter ? It's his body, after all, which needs relief.

And while we're at it (and I dare not think what many South Americans think of this one), let's 'deconstruct' the right of a woman not be interfered with while she is asleep. Yes, yes, Assange has needs, you may be right, he's so anti-imperialist, but again - and maybe this is far too progressive for South American governments - is there any way that the woman's rights can be, in some small way, taken into account ?

No,perhaps you're right - from that confluence of opinion of far (faux) Left and far Right, of Assange and Akin, the answer from the Left these days is a resounding 'NO'. They love it, gagging for it in fact, especially when they're pretending they're not.

Maybe they should just get used to it, condom or no condom, asleep or awake. You can't rush 'rights'. Rome wasn't built in a day.

Cheers,

Joe

:)

Loudmouth,

Let's deconstruct Britain's threat to remove embassy status to get a man "wanted for questioning" (although Sweden refuses to question him in Britain) about "a-l-l-e-g-a-t-i-o-n-s" that he didn't have permission not to use a condom.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/allegation

You seem to taking the accuser's word as the absolute truth as fuel for your argument.

Obviously it still doesn't strike through the density of your bias that all this is slightly over-the-top for a man wanted for questioning on dubious sexual liaisons with women who, well after the fact, and in consultation with each other, decided that their modesty had been impugned.

Poirot,

I read your link, and I find the arguments put forward tenuous at best. Both countries have independent Judicial systems, of which Sweden is well known to respect the rights of the accused. Sweden could not extradite JA without the permission of the UK.

Hi Poirot,

Yes, allegation only, for which he must answer in accordance with Swedish procecure, not yours or mine. Until he does so, he is neither guilty of not guilty.

I guess the bottom like is that he is accused of abusing two Wikileaks volunteers, women who gave him a place to stay and seemed to be more than generous to him. They may not make that alleged mistake again.

The Swedes have demanded that he be extradited to Sweden to face questioning about those charges. It is their prerogative where they question him, not yours or mine. Call me biased but I hope he receives the full force of justice.

Take that however you like.

Joe :)