Highgate Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Seems pretty straightforward to me, everyone is in favour of him having to answer for his alleged crimes in Sweden. It is correct that he respond to such allegations and serve time in Sweden if found guilty. However surely no one wants this to be an excuse to shuttle him off to the US to answer for what Wikileaks have done, but that is what many people suspect nevertheless, and it would seem to be a reasonable suspicion to hold. If there were some way for the Swedes to try him without exposing him to extradition to the USA it would seem ideal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highgate Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 On 10/2/2016 at 15:21, jono said: Planted evidence to nail a genuine baddy ? Torture of known terrorists ? An assisted death by a doctor of a terminally ill patient ? Extraordinary rendition ? Carpet bombing of a deadly foe ? Risky medical trials ? Not sure it's reasonable to put compassionate euthanasia in the same category as torture and carpet bombing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jono Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 It isn't about categories . It's about an open discourse over grey areas of morality and the different naratives that enable actions to be justified in different circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highgate Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 So they are all in the category of 'morally grey areas' by your own description. Seem like chalk and cheese to me. But i guess it's subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 On 12/02/2016 at 23:17, Highgate said: If there were some way for the Swedes to try him without exposing him to extradition to the USA it would seem ideal. Yep - such as go over and question him in the embassy. They were offered that and they turned it down - which is a tacit admission that the whole thing is a sham cooked up to get him extradited to the US Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highgate Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 3 hours ago, StivePesley said: Yep - such as go over and question him in the embassy. They were offered that and they turned it down - which is a tacit admission that the whole thing is a sham cooked up to get him extradited to the US Yeah, it seems the Ecuadorian Embassy was willing to co-operate fully with the Swedish authorities and allow him to be interviewed and questioned at least, in London. However they didn't take them up on the offer and now the statute of limitations has expired on two of the lesser charges and they have to be dropped. He can still be charged with rape (which was had been discontinued in 2010 but reinstated shortly afterwards). All very odd behaviour by the Swedes which lends credence to the UN's Working Group on Arbitrary Detention finding that he is in fact being held in arbitrary detention by the UK and Swedish government, and to those who believe that the UK and Swedish government's actions in the matter are directed from Washington. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.