What is everyone's take on the plight of Julian Assange?

Now that he has been granted asylum by Ecuador, British authorities have refused to grant him safe passage out of the country.

And what of the threat to revoke Ecuador's embassy status and storm the embassy which threatens a gross violation of diplomatic practice accepted under international law....all to pursue a man who hasn't yet been charged with a crime.

My take is this is one huge "stitch" to take out Assange.

http://theconversation.edu.au/britain-bungles-assange-asylum-bid-8903

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/16/julian-assange-asylum-ecuador

Poirot, I think a lot of this is grandstanding by the Ecuador Government for home consumption and by Assange to keep the funds flowing in from his followers. The UK did not threaten to storm the Embassy. They pointed out in a letter that the diplomatic status of the Embassy could be revoked under the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987 if the Embassy is being used for other than diplomatic purposes.

Of course the UK will not grant safe passage to Assange. They have an obligation under international law to send him to Sweden to answer charges of criminal conduct. Ecuador giving him political asylum doesn’t change that. The accusations are for criminal, not political, activity.

Agronomist,

..."The accusations are for criminal, not political, activity."

To imagine that the threat to revoke embassy status is not "unusual" in pursuit of a man who has yet to be charged. Obviously it is extremely "political" (unless one wishes to naively follow the official line).

Poirot, you are conflating several things. 1. Embassy premises must be used exclusively for diplomatic purposes. Harbouring a non-resident and non-citizen for whom an arrest warrant for alleged criminal activity is extant would appear to be non-diplomatic activity.

2. The fact that Assange has not been charged is because he is not in Sweden. A European Arrest Warrant is extant and the UK is obliged by international law to deliver him up.

The only political activity appears to be on the part of the Ecuadorean Government.

$10 says America is behind the whole thing and the lap dogs (politicians) in England, Sweden, Australia will bend over backwards to do there bidding. This whole episode in Sweden has CIA honeypot all over it.

I like the cut of his jib. Well, I also think he looks rather weedish and a bit too metro or something. I guarantee he reads GQ.

I hate the name. I don't watch the TV news so I don't think I have the pronunciation down pat. Usarnge is how my brain reads it. Don't correct me as it would create an irritating feeling every time I correct myself. Actually the irritating feeling is already there due to the slight uncertainty.

That's about as important it all is to me though. I just like the spirit of any troublemaker really, and my anti-authoritarian spirit makes me like the embarrassment he causes while not really liking the guy that much.

I hate how the left embraces him so, as some kind of hero, and I think if a rugby league player was charged with similar offences they'd be baying for blood. Women are totally trustworthy when claiming an elite athlete is a rapist, but dodgy as buggery when claiming a mild-mannered ideologue is a rapist.

I imagine it would be nice being him though, with all that attention, and he already has successfully pulled the black-rimmed glasses groupies in Sweden.(What is it about girls of a certain age that are so easily pulled in by the effeminate revolutionary socialist. I suppose it's a stage of life just before they realise they'd rather be shagged by a more masculine man who is really just as intelligent but without the pretentious moralising BS)

What was the topic again?

Go the Ecuadorians!

Sounds like a lot of fun all this wasting court moneys and protests and people taking life way too seriously. I think on the whole governments take themselves way too seriously. What's the difference anyway, we know they are generally pretty corrupt, and motives for things are quite transparent, yet we have all this outrage to stop someone with a penchant for sifting through boring sh1t to prove the obvious.