Goin’ Doon the Watter 542


UPDATE: Craig is on way back to London to be with Wikileaks following the arrest of Julian Assange under the Extradition Act. He does still intend to speak at Rothesay.

Scotland Yard statement:

Julian Assange, 47, (03.07.71) has today, Thursday 11 April, been further arrested on behalf of the United States authorities, at 10:53hrs after his arrival at a central London police station. This is an extradition warrant under Section 73 of the Extradition Act. He will appear in custody at Westminster Magistrates’ Court as soon as possible.

I am speaking in Rothesay at St Paul’s Church Hall, Deanhood Place, at 2pm on Saturday. I am heading back up to Scotland today. I will be there in any circumstances, and will dash back down afterwards should events with Julian and Wikileaks require. I have incidentally had a definitive reply from the Embassy of Ecuador that I am not allowed to visit Julian even though he has asked me to; definitive evidence that Assange is now being treated by Moreno as a prisoner.

I have to confess I have never been to the Isle of Bute, despite a very bad impression of Andy Stewart singing “Goin’ Doon the Watter fur the Fair” being one of the large variety of embarrassing things I am liable to do when drunk. I look forward to it enormously and am grateful to Rothesay Historical Society for hosting me. I always fret that nobody will turn up to hear me and am very honoured when people do.

As ever, I do not know exactly what I will say until I stand up. But I have in mind touching on Scotland’s right to self-determination and the routes to Independence through international recognition. I will argue that a referendum is one route but not the only one, and while I accept it is the most desirable way forward, I shall advance other avenues that might be quite legally pursued if a referendum is blocked, stressing that a nation’s Independence is exclusively a matter of international law, not domestic law.

I shall argue that the Scottish government needs to get on with it and it is a massive mistake to allow the UK government to recover from its chaos and process the Brexit debacle. Scotland should act before the UK regroups, not after.

I shall also argue that just as the Scots have the right of self-determination, so do the English. It is not just bad tactics for the SNP to prioritise stopping Brexit over Independence, it is wrong. The English plainly voted to leave the EU and it is not Scotland’s role to thwart the democratic will of the English people. Scotland should become Independent, and remain an EU member, as its people voted. England and Wales should leave the EU as their people voted, and those who truly believe in Scottish Independence should realise it is not our right to prevent the English from doing what they self-determine. Let’s get Independence and do our own thing, leaving them to do theirs.

There needs to be a referendum on Irish unification.

I shall also ramble around Wikileaks, the Mueller report, the Skripal saga, the Integrity Initiative, and answer questions in any other area. Time now to start back up the A1!


542 thoughts on “Goin’ Doon the Watter

1 2 3 5
  • Skye Mull

    Seeking independence is one thing. But remaining in (or rejoining) the EU is madness.

    • freddy

      Jumping from the arms of one tyrant to another. But I don’t believe the (r)UK will ever be allowed to leave in any meaningful sense, so perhaps the point is moot.

      Anyway, drive safely Craig!

      • Michael McNulty

        I agree. I think to get rid of the dictatorial EU in the end we will have to burn this shithole country to the ground. As an Englishman I could march on Parliament but I couldn’t march on Brussels. I can’t walk on water; I haven’t spoken schoolboy French in over forty years; and on principle I didn’t renew my passport because of its Orwellian bio- aspect. How the hell is that not foreign occupation?

        Nobody in this country ever voted for Barnier, Tusk, Merkel et al, and just look at how Macron treats his own people to wonder how he’d treat Johnny English. Burn the country down; tell the EU we know they don’t want to finance its rebuild so they can piss off.

    • Matt

      I’m inclined to agree with Freddy. It’s insanity to demand independence from one union and then walk right into another. You’re seeing how difficult it is to actually leave the EU. What if Scotland decide later down the road they want to leave? Is it not better to see how England fares first? Maybe we’ll be better off in ten years, and if an independent Scotland is part of the EU and wishes to leave, it will take years of stress.

      Also, if this somehow happens, please let it be called Scot Off.

      • N_

        Those are exactly the same figures by which Scotland voted against the SNP a year later, in 2017. 63% of votes went to other parties, and 37% went to the SNP. So there’s no mandate for saying Brexit in Scotland is felt by Scottish people to be a Scottish national issue, however loud that position gets shouted by the partei.

        • Jeff

          Bollocks. 2017 was FPTP; votes shared amongst 5 parties. SNP won. EU Ref was binary choice. Remain won.

  • giyane

    Well said Craig. The EU showed last night that it is predatory for membership even for a few months penalty time. To retain Scotland would be a compelling trophy for EU injured pride.
    You might have to make Scotland bigger though because 17 million non-racist remainders, the entire population of Africa, and the younger generation of non-voting travel-hungry English youngsters will all want to migrate to an EU Scotland. Including this totally Tory-disgusted from Tunbridge Wells.

    Climate change be with you up the dirt track road to Bonnie Scotland.

  • Mist001

    “It is not just bad tactics for the SNP to prioritise stopping Brexit over Independence, it is wrong.”

    Exactly, so the question is; why?

    • Clark

      This is not a protest where we march to a destination and then go home.

      It is a rebellion: “…round the clock until Government acts

        • Clark

          No. They believe that God will initiate Armageddon, imprison Satan, save the few good people, kill all the bad people, resurrect all the dead people and return the entire Earth to the paradise state of the Garden of Eden.

          I eventually escaped childhood religious indoctrination by embracing rationalism and science. Simple observation confirms that the icecaps are melting twice as fast as predicted, and the species extinction rate is a thousand times the background rate. Projections indicate that if CO2 emissions are reduced to net zero withn 12 years, temperature rise has 50/50 chance of being limited to 1.5 centigrade – the last ice age was only 4 centigrade colder. But far from reducing, net CO2 is rising faster than ever, suggesting 5 centigrade rise and consequently Earth becoming unrecognisable. That’s without feedback amplifications.

          https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/wp-content/plugins/sio-bluemoon/graphs/co2_10k.png

          Of five previous mass extinctions, four were preceded by rapid CO2 concentration increase. The one 255 million years ago wiped out 97% of all life on Earth.

          • Michael McNulty

            I believe in the man-made contribution to global warming…we’ve put too much smoke and exhaust into the atmosphere since the industrial revolution to not make a difference…but I suspect Fukushima is a life-ending event, albeit not for a century or two. They’re not even trying to stop its deadly emissions, are they? I think it will sterilise the earth by killing off even the microbes. It’s going to leave earth totally barren for millions of years. Perhaps Mother Nature will decide big brains and tool-making hands was a big mistake, and if there’s time for higher life to evolve again before the sun becomes a red giant then intelligence ought to go no higher than pack hunters on four legs.

          • Clark

            Michael McNulty, from scientific papers I’ve seen (but not studied in depth) marine life in the Pacific is recovering quite well from the tsunami – not just the nuclear disaster; massive industry installations with all their chemicals were also washed into the ocean.

            That is to be expected because life has considerable defences against nuclear pollution, because various common elements have natural radioactive isotopes – carbon, potassium, polonium, thorium, uranium etc. It is true that nuclear fission products – iodine, strontium etc. – bypass those defences somewhat, but the surge in wildlife around the Chernobyl site suggests that you are being overly pessimistic in this matter.

            Rejecting nuclear technology would do remarkably little to address environmental degradation. Certain activists have greatly exaggerated these risks; Helen Caldicott is one of the worst offenders. In doing so they have drawn attention away from the far greater dangers of more mundane technology, especially agriculture, and discredited activism among some sections of the scientifically literate. It is important to apply due weight.

  • Jamesworkshop

    You say you aren’t being allowed to visit, but is their any possibility that he has already been removed from the embassy and thus is not available to be visited. I’d heard some rumors that he had but I was pretty dubious about them.

  • Charles Bostock

    As the embassy of Ecuador is, under international law , sovereign Ecuadorian territory, the embassy is fully entitled to decide who shall enter it and who shall not. I’m sure that Craig, as a former Office man, will be happy to confirm that unambiguously.

    • N_

      @Charles – Craig will not confirm it because it is not true. The embassy is not sovereign Ecuadorean territory. The British authorities have no right to enter it, though. That’s different. If they did enter it, presumably it was with Ecuadorean permission. If it was not with Ecuadorean permission, we’d have heard it by now. All the other countries in the world with the exception of the US and I__ael would be denouncing the British action.

      If you want a proper legal point, here’s one: what does Lenin Moreno mean when he says “asylum status” was withdrawn, given that Julian Assange is an Ecuadorean citizen?

  • Charles Bostock

    I should have added that it is of course incorrect to say that President Moreno is treating Mr Julian Assange as a prisoner. I am absolutely sure that the President would be delighted if Mr Julian Assange took the decision to leave the embassy. It will be recalled that in general, gaolers attempt to prevent their guests from leaving.

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    You remind me as a child of two brothers from upstate New York, the Ackerman boys, who were always ‘going’ doonn the Watter and hitting the Battam.’ Is Ackerman a Scottish name or are there a lot of Scots in Oswego, NY?

      • N_

        Asylum status cannot be removed from someone who does not have it. He originally had it, but then he became an Ecuadorean citizen. If you are a citizen of a country, you do not have asylum status in it. Has he been stripped of citizenship? I suspect not, otherwise Moreno would have said.

        Surely the correct way of acting by the British authorities if they wanted to take Assange into custody would have to been apply for extradition? There is an extradition agreement between Britain and Ecuador. Bundling someone from one country to another without an extradition request is usually reserved for a) when they have not entered the first country legally, and b) when there is no extradition agreement between the two countries.

        People might to look at the case of Bobby Fischer. The US government renewed his passport and then revoked it without telling him, and when he used it to get into Japan they told the Japanese authorities it was an invalid passport. They didn’t try to extradite him, because the “offence” he was accused of – playing chess in Yugoslavia – wasn’t an offence in Japan. They tried instead to get the Japanese authorities to bundle him on to a US plane so that the US authorities could throw him into a high-security prison like Marion where they probably would have killed him.

  • Jack

    Horrible images from the arrest, it shows that Assange and we were right all along, – that he WOULD get arrested as soon as he stepped out of that building. Western democracy folks…

      • bj

        Just the few pathological cases of Schadenfreude and Kadavergehorsamkeit that are on display here.
        The nutters should hold their field day somewhere else, not here.

        They are also without content, so I think they should just be removed.
        Comments after all are moderated, and have been removed for lesser sins. These are offensive.

      • Tom Welsh

        “It has often been said that power corrupts. But it is perhaps equally important to realize that weakness, too, corrupts. Power corrupts the few, while weakness corrupts the many. Hatred, malice, rudeness, intolerance, and suspicion are the faults of weakness”.

        – Eric Hoffer

  • Millsy

    Home Secretary ,Sajid Javid , ( try saying that with a few beers in you ! ) on the arrest of Assange has stated that ”no one is above the law ! ”
    Whose law ? Ours ? The US ? What about the people bringing the ”charges” ?
    The man should be a stand up comedian .

      • Clark

        But by far the majority of bail violations are dropped. It seems remarkably unlikely that this is about bail.

        • Martinned

          If someone insists on giving the British criminal justice system the finger on a daily basis for the better part of a decade, I don’t think they can reasonably expect to have their charges dropped. Or, as the Code for Crown Prosecutors puts it: “The greater the impact of the offending on the community, the more likely it is that a prosecution is required.”

          • N_

            Your second sentence doesn’t support your first. Giving the finger to the criminal “justice” system isn’t an offence, however much the thugs and gunslingers who work for the ruling scum might want to get their vengeance.

            (And actually it’s usually two fingers in Britain and Australia – say what you like about Julian Assange but he isn’t from the United States.)

          • Charles Bostock

            What Martinned says is exactly what I’ve been trying to point out to people. The Assange bail jumping is high profile and to a large extent it’s Mr Julian Assange himself who’s made it high-profile. His supporters – including Mr Craig Murray – also bear considerable responsibility for that state of affairs (especially those who didn’t really care about Assange but just used his case to bash the UK state).
            That’s the truth.

        • Clark

          I may have that wrong, but certainly, in 2016 there ware well over 13,000 arrest warrants pursued with less vigour than the millions spent on hounding Assange, who was never accused of any violence:

          https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36024690

          “There are 13,492 known warrants outstanding, although nine forces refused to provide details or did not reply to our request.

          Of those forces who did reply, the Metropolitan Police had the highest number of outstanding warrants with 1,835. Greater Manchester, West Midlands and West Yorkshire Police also had more than 1,000 each.

          – Rape accused on the run

          – Souny Ibrahim Mustafa allegedly assaulted and raped an 18-year-old woman in the street in Derby in 2005. He has been wanted since 2006

          – Priyank Jayendra Rathod was sentenced to six years in his absence at Derby Crown Court on October 28, 2015 for sexual assault on a girl under 13, attempted rape, causing/inciting prostitution of/pornography involving a child under 13, two counts of making an indecent photograph of a child and possession of an indecent photograph/pseudo photograph of a child. He has been wanted since December 2014”

        • Michael McNulty

          I’m not surprised the Met have arrested Julian. I truly suspect the lawless Yanks under Trump (how the hell did they find an idiot who swaggers more than idiot Bush baby?), said to May if you don’t arrest him our military police will snatch him. Somehow we lost our sovereignty to The World’s Number 1 Rogue Nation, but naturally both the US and UK regimes will prefer to hide that.

          • Tom Welsh

            “Somehow we lost our sovereignty to The World’s Number 1 Rogue Nation…”

            Although it’s not widely publicized, that happened sometime during WW2.

            When the Americans invade a country and take it over, they don’t necessarily have to fire their guns. At that time Britain was for sale, as without money and supplies the Germans would have conquered us.

      • Ken Kenn

        So once he’s done his bit of stir ( at her Majesty’s – not your pleasure) he’ll be free to walk the UK streets with complete impunity
        free from let or hinderance?

        You don’t half talk crap.

        He’ll be held until the US demands they hand him over.

        Legal Aid will not be available as justice always has a price and if you can’t afford it you have no justice.

        By the way: The Mafia have invited themselves round to my house next week because my landlord says it’s alright.

        Notably the grovelling and snivelling media were there to witness the arrest and only Ruptly (RT) got the shots.

        ‘Twas ever thus.

        • Martinned

          I suspect there will be an extradition request from the US at some point in the next few months, and I assume he won’t be bailed again, meaning that he’ll have to sort out his extradition litigation from prison. Depending on how that goes, he might be free again by the end of the year, or it might take a few years longer.

          • Tom Welsh

            “Depending on how that goes, he might be free again by the end of the year, or it might take a few years longer”.

            I assume you are speaking poetically.

            It is true that, in a sense, the dead are free.

    • Tom Welsh

      The law that the US and UK governments make up on the spot to attain their ends.

      The law that the UK government ignored when the UN told them to release Mr Assange.
      https://news.un.org/en/story/2016/02/521632-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-arbitrarily-detained-sweden-and-uk-un-panel

      The law that the UK government ignored when the UN told them to let the Chagos islanders return to their homes.
      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/25/un-court-rejects-uk-claim-to-sovereignty-over-chagos-islands

      The law that the UK government ignored when it eagerly accepted information extracted from prionsers by torture by the Uzbek government.
      https://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-denies-entry-to-former-british-ambassador-craig-murray/5544480

      The law the UK government ignored when its officials found that no crime had been committed in the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes.
      https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Jean_Charles_de_Menezes

      I won’t even attempt the mammoth, superhuman, Sysiphean task of listing the US government’s egregious offences against law and justice. One might mention in passing the well over ten million Asian and African civilians it has murdered since 1945, without the slightest flicker of legal justification – those murders occurred during unprovoked wars of aggression, “the ultimate international crime”.

      For a representative sample of less prominent crimes – mostly against individual US citizens – try https://thefreethoughtproject.com/

    • Jo

      One wonders if the UN person due on 25th April is still coming and will have access…can the UN actually do anything now….hope so.

      • Tom Welsh

        Nobody powerful in the UK or the USA gives a rat’s ass for the UN. It merely provides a useful screen on the occasions whn it says what they want it to.

      • Dom

        Perhaps he should do the honourable thing and make a speech that serves his persecutors.

      • Republicofscotland

        You do realise that this image of Assange being forcibly removed from the embassy will do Britain and Ecuador’s reputation no good.

        I’d also wager that the image will turn many people against the British state. The thin veil of justice you speak about will be seen through by most folk, who’ve taken an interest in Assange’s predicament.

        • Clark

          What a disgusting comment. It is obvious that Assange is being made an example to intimidate publishers and journalists.

        • Republicofscotland

          Gloating does not suit you Martinned, I thought you above such trivialities.

          You and I now have one less voice to inform us of what’s really going on.

        • Michael McNulty

          The footage of Julian being dragged away like that confirms Britain as a dictatorship, and those will be lasting images of Britain in the same way the lasting images of the US are of a wire-ringed detention camp with Old Glory hanging on the watchtowers.

      • ciarán

        First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
        Because I was not a socialist.
        at people like Martinned
        Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
        Because I was not a trade unionist.

        Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
        Because I was not a Jew.

        Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
        Martin Niemöller

      • Adrian Parsons

        To paraphrase Louis Althusser, with you, stupidity takes on its simplest form: ignorance.

        • Charles Bostock

          Adrian

          You’re probably feeling very emotional right now, but please remember that Craig and the Mods don’t like simple insults and ad hominems and often delete them in accordance with Craig’s posting guidelines.

          • Adrian Parsons

            “You’re probably feeling very emotional right now…”

            Au contraire, I just have a low tolerance for dilettantes and ideologues posing as savants. Empty vessels and all that, old bean.

      • Tom Welsh

        “Odds that he’ll make some pompous self-serving rambling speech in court?”

        I take it you meant “exercise his civil and legal right to defend himself against the accusations”.

    • Ingwe

      And now watch and be amazed (not) how our wonderful legal system manipulates the choice of magistrate and the judge(s) hearing any appeal(s) to ensure that the one thing JA won’t get, is a fair hearing and application of the law.

      • Charles Bostock

        The above is an appallingly cynical, dishonest and vicious attack on the judiciary and I wish to place on record that at least one reader/commenter on this blog – ie, me – disagrees with it 100%.

        • Tom Welsh

          No matter how appallingly oppressive and unmistakable tyranny becomes, there are always those weak characters who persuade themselves that they love it.

      • Tom Welsh

        Exactly so. It has repeatedly been shown that, when necessary, venial officials can always be found to do literally anything required of them. The payoff might come soon or late, and might consist of money, goods, services or just a K or peerage. (Although why anyone would want to incur the disgrace of joining the House of Cronies is beyond me).

    • Jack

      It is a very big police operation for breaching the bail – obviously that accusation was made up and he will most likely be sent to US as soon as possible – as we all knew all along. I guess Assange’s fate is in the hands of Trump now.

      • J

        What species of arsehole gloats over the precedent of prosecuting a journalist for publishing the truth?

      • bj

        Why is this comment allowed?

        It’s not to the point and has no content other than to be offensive, like most of the comments by this hateful individual do.

      • Michael McNulty

        It also adds to the suspicion the PTB fear a general election may be coming soon, in which they can’t hold back (rig the vote against) Jeremy Corbyn, and that legal developments sympathetic to Julian’s dissident status might have seen him moved abroad in some measure of safety.

      • Republicofscotland

        Yes looking at Assange he appeared to be confused as if he’d been adminstered with something prior to his manhandling.

        • Jack

          Republicofscotland

          “adminstered with something prior to his manhandling.”

          Probably not needed, he must be mentally exhausted from all these years being “locked” up.
          But yes he didnt look well. A very sad day…

    • N_

      If the BBC are saying that, then they are talking absolute sh*t. No Swedish charges were ever laid. He was never charged with committing any offence in Sweden.

      The strange thing here is that neither the Ecuadorean nor the British authorities seem to have their story straight. This suggests they had to act fast to prevent something.

  • J

    Every reader of the blog should contact their MP if they haven’t already to put the case for opposing extradition and for the immediate release of Julian Assange.

      • J

        Your concern for the law is notably selective. And they most certainly can oppose illegal extradition.

        • bj

          I showed before he is biased to the bone.
          The buttoned up citing of law is to mask the void where usually people have norms and morals.
          The German term Kadavergehorsamkeit is applicable to him.

          Something else he doesn’t understand is that laws van be immoral. During 40-45 the law was to bring in Jews. Many resisted and saw the evil immorality. Martinned would have been the one who turned in Anne Frank, because she resisted turning herself in.

          • Martinned

            On the contrary, you’re the one who doesn’t understand the difference between law and morality. I most certainly do, which is why when I make a statement about the law, I don’t let my legal opinion be influenced by my opinions about morality. As a moral matter, I think Assange should be charged with absconding and punished for that, but not extradited to the US. A couple of months in jail seems fine, but I can see the case for letting him off with “time served”.

            But legally, the Americans are entitled to ask for him to be extradited. And until such a request is decided, the British are legally (!) required to make sure he doesn’t go anywhere. And his history of absconding doesn’t exactly make him an ideal candidate for bail in the future. That said, I’d think there are several good legal reasons why the British shouldn’t/can’t extradite him, including the likelihood that he’d get an unfair trial contrary to art. 6 ECHR and the likelihood that his prosecution is politically motivated contrary to s. 81 of the Extradition Act 2003. (Although admittedly I’m no expert on extradition law, so I don’t know what the precedents are on s. 81.)

          • J

            I understand the difference perfectly. That you make immoral but legalistic statements is entirely a reflection upon you.

        • Martinned

          MPs don’t need to oppose illegal extradition, that’s what we have courts for. (The clue is in the “illegal”…)

          I imagine that Assange will spend the next couple of years in extradition litigation of one form or another, quite possibly all the way up to Strasbourg. He’ll have his day in court.

  • Jack

    Indeed. “Martinned” should be banned no doubt, and above all – ignore these trolls, they want you to reply to their provocational messages.

  • nevermind

    Who will be the next journalist dragged out of their office for [practising free speech and making the world aware of horrendous war crimes committed in their name? including Komodo.
    Now is a good time for journalists to come out and speak up about the daily censorship they face, the many subjects they had to drop in their careers.
    Maybe the BBC, the main bender of facts and truth, should start this crush for truth and openness, they could start with the Westminster paedophile cover up, that would shut up a few politicians et al and make journalists feel so much better of themselves.

  • N_

    I assume Julian Assange did not leave the embassy voluntarily. I also assume he was not extradited.

    So by what legal procedure was he removed? English law does not apply inside the embassy. The British police have no right of entry unless the British government derecognises the embassy. Did the Ecuadorean authorities arrest him and escort him to the door?

    And what message was he trying to get out?

    • N_

      Of course the Ecuadorean authorities could have invited the British police into the embassy to arrest him, but this has not been officially stated. (Screw unattributed “sources”.)

      • N_

        And what is this absolute crap about Assange having his asylum removed? He is an Ecuadorean citizen!

        • Eric the Half Bee

          Just because you’re citizen of a country doesn’t mean you can squat indefinitely in one of its embassies.

    • Jack

      N_

      Apparently the ecuadorian gov let the police in (rumours at the moment). To make it more confusing on the legality, we dont know the nationality of these policemen that took him (they could be ecuadorians).
      Apparently he shouted “Resist” but most of what he said was inaudible. Also he had a pamphlet or book? when he walked out with a man on it??

    • Martinned

      English law most certainly does apply inside the embassy. Contrary to popular belief, embassies are not foreign territory.

      British police do not have right of entry unless they are invited in, which is what happened in this case.

      • N_

        @Martinmed – I know the embassy is British territory. But it is inviolable under the Vienna Convention, so it is without consequence to assert that English law applies there.

      • Tom Welsh

        “British police do not have right of entry unless they are invited in, which is what happened in this case”.

        Just like vampires, in fact.

  • Jones

    Utterly ashamed of my country for allowing the brutal forced removal of Julian Assange, and the people who took part in his forced removal by following orders of corrupt government officials are particularly despicable.

    • N_

      Indeed. The look on the faces of those 10 or so British cops. Never has the phrase “they’re scum and they know they are” been more apt. Snivelling cowardly monarch’s boys, the lot of them – never “braver” than when there are 10 of them against one victim.

    • Bob Smith

      What do you suggest police officers do when someone resists arrest? It is always a distressing sight when force has to be used to arrest someone but to call the officers who perform such duties as despicable is, for me, OTT and unhelpful. By all means criticise and shame the politicians and political officers who have ordered the arrest but not the poor saps having to make it. From the photographs I have seen he was not tasered or manacled but I can assure you that even if the smallest and weakest person resists it needs a few officers to safely restrain someone.

      • N_

        You can assure me? Well the issue is not one of objective necessity. I am not going to respond at length to the “only obeying orders” argument. The authorities are corrupt and the rulers are a band of thugs.

        • Bob Smith

          Just trying to keep a sense of perspective, which you clearly aren’t by raising the issue of the Nuremberg defence and in doing so start to equate police officers executing a warrant with Nazi war criminals. Indeed your shrill stupidity comes across as that of the drunken ranting of a blow hard in the worst Wetherspoons known to the Earth.

      • Jones

        anyone who follows orders claiming they are a poor sap having to do it is despicable to me, to know such saps allow themselves to be controlled by corrupt government is actually not reassuring at all !

        • Bob Smith

          I’m sure they wouldn’t call themselves poor saps. That’s my description. Personally I think the decision to arrest him is ridiculous with very worrying political connotations and repercussions. I just think describing the officers carrying out their lawful duties as ‘despicable’ is a bit strong. As I said in my original comment, what do you suggest they do if someone resists arrest? It is a polite and reasonable question. If your answer is to refuse to make an arrest, I simply disagree.

    • Tom Welsh

      It’s not our country you should be ashamed of: it’s the pluperfect swine who have taken it over.

      “A bureaucracy is very much like a cesspool, the really big chunks float to the top”.

      – Imhoff’s Law

  • DG

    Assange nicked. No idea on what charges. Trust the British Police to go in totally OTT and on the wrong side as usual.

  • Mist001

    They can’t hold him indefinitely and there’s not much chance of him getting bail again, so they have to send him somewhere.

    • Martinned

      That depends on how his extradition hearing goes, assuming there will be one. If he wins, he’s a free man. (Although I suspect there might be a possibility of him being required to surrender his passport pending any appeals.)

      • Tom Welsh

        “If he wins, he’s a free man”.

        Yeah. Free to go home, out of sight, and have an “accident”. (Unless they go the whole hog and take the place out with a Hellfire missile).

1 2 3 5

Comments are closed.