As everybody has said, it is the United States. What has not been clearly stated is the fuzzy & irrational reasoning of our and the European politicians who act out of irrational economic, defence, and global fears.

The economic reality is that our nations have 'free' economies and business self-interests will continue to be the principle grounds for the commercial decisions to do business in each other's nations.

There is a delusional idea that the US would leap to our rescue if we are invaded unexpectedly - this is not possible or likely.

For example Indonesia by using the colony in New Guinea is about 250km from Cape York or 400Km from the Northern Territory, they could establish an irrevocable foothold within a day; and with US corporations like Bechtel being business partners with Jakarta, the truth is that the US would object and then do nothing as Sydney and Melbourne became Indonesian cities. We have a combined regular & reservist force of 81,000 opposed to 271,000 Indonesian regular forces who also have benefit of a aeronautics industry that has been designing & building Indonesian military aircraft for decades. Then there is China who have enough of their own resources but lets imagine if it wanted put its foot down and claim Australia, do you imagine the US would start a nuclear war on our behalf? - bottom line is that pandering to the US doesn't actually improve our defence, the US activities in Australia are because it benefits the US and we don't have to pander to unreasonable demands to arrest Australian citizens to continue the US Australian relations.

Then there is the Security Council, but when has Australia ever called for support of the Security Council, or when has the US ever changed a foreign policy decision on our behalf?

Bottom line is that Australia like every other nation needs to stand on its own feet and protect its own citizens, that is the job we expect Canberra to be working on. Unfortunately the people at Parliament House are a bit dim witted.

You are not a lawyer Wendy and it shows in your flawed reasoning.

Assange has managed to manipulate a government of questionable background into providing him with the possibility of him evading his liability to face the consequences of his illegal actions.

He is entitled to due process, and has an obligation to submit to it.

It would be extremely poor form to allow him to bring off this manoeuvre. Once he sets foot on British soil he should be arrested. This includes British air space, in the event of any smart alec tactics with a helicopter.

Also, you now have 100 percent proof that you are wrong. Marilyn Shepherd has agreed with you.

What illegal actions has Assange committed? Our cops say none, the media who published the reports have not been hounded so what illegal thing did he do?

He is a whistleblower.

Leo Lane strangely said:
"evading his liability to face the consequences of his illegal actions. He is entitled to due process, and has an obligation to submit to it."

Dear Leo, this is the point. Assange did check with the authorities and he waited another week before he left. He has made himself available in both the UK and now the Embassy to any further enquiries, and it is Sweden which is not following due process.

Legally Sweden perfected its answer when it agreed Assange could leave, it is only out of courtesy (a kindness) that Assange has agreed to answer any further questions. It is not due process to extract people from other countries just to answer questions.

I am also sensitive to this issue because by your reasoning Indonesia could demand that I be sent to Jakarta for questioning. The instant I was on Indonesian soil they could then convict me for 15 years for supporting self-determination aspirations in Papua, they could also claim that I was a terrorist and hand me to America for investigation on that charge. I and dozens of others if not hundreds would be in fear of deportation for our human rights advocacy..

"How about this, if you want to remain wilfully ignorant be my guest but keep your ignorant ramblings to yourself."

Marilyn, don't tell what to do, especially when you misinterpret me; and ignore what I said; I gave links to deaths that Assange's sanctimonious leaks have directly caused before the most recent one and asked the question as to how many deaths have been caused by those.

Do you really think that divulging strategic information will not have ramifications?

Otherwise, I believe in full government transparency and no censorship; is that plain? But what Assange has done is not that; and until Wikileaks is over in China, Iran, Pakistan etc releasing information from these hellholes then I'll reserve my respect.

As for the sexual assault charges, private meetings between prosecutors and charged citizens?! You must be joking, and that is what Assange is demanding; who does he think he is, God?

Daeron, due process was the application by Sweden for extradition, which was granted, despite Assange’s opposition, through his legal representatives.

He appealed and lost.

He is now seeking to escape due process with the assistance of the disreputable country of Ecuador.

When he sets foot on British soil, due process will be carried out. He will be sent to Sweden.

Your ramblings show a remarkable lack of comprehension of the subject matter, but that seems to be a basic requirement to be a supporter of this amoral lout.

Why will you not use a dictionary?