Allow Assange to Sunbathe???

We have all heard ridiculous statements coming from the mouths of politicians in recent years. So how about this gem! The Ecuadorian government will lobby the British government to allow Julian Assange to sunbathe because it is a fundamental human right! The report is so bizarre, but the world is so crazy these days I believe it.

Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino

Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino

The Foreign Minister of Ecuador, Ricardo Patino, visited Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London last Sunday where he has been hiding from justice for almost a year. Mr. Patino will talk with William Hague this week about Assange and said of the proposed meeting: “I will be asking the British government to allow Mr Assange to sunbathe and enjoy the warm weather and sunshine because, unfortunately, at this moment in time he hasn’t been able to do so for a year. His right to intimacy, mobility, a normal life and health is being restricted.”

I’m afraid my reaction is, so what, he is a fugitive from justice.

Once again we see the ‘uman rights laws being twisted to someone’s advantage. Perhaps the Ecuadorian’s think the police should escort him to Hyde Park and find a nice spot for him to lay down and catch some ‘rays’, and then escort him back to the Embassy?  They will be demanding that he has the right to go for a Big Mac and fries as his ‘uman right next!

His predicament has nothing whatever to do with the British government or people, for we are merely carrying out the law. Assange is wanted on an International Arrest Warrant initiated by the Swedish government, and is being treated just like any other person on the run from justice.

Assange in the Ecuadorian Embassy

Assange in the Ecuadorian Embassy

He has been hiding in the Embassy for almost a year and continues to protest his innocence, and he may well be, who am I to judge, but if that is so let him prove it in court in Sweden. He has woven a web around the charges by saying that if he goes to Sweden they will hand him over to the Americans. Sorry matey, but you broke the law there too!

The intentions behind the act, while eliciting a huge amount of sympathy world-wide, do not detract from the fact that most sensible people will think before they act! If he did not think of the consequences of his actions before he took them then he is a fool. You do not put thousands of secret documents on the web and expect the government to just shrug their shoulders and say: Damn!

I have no means of knowing what damage his actions may or may not have done to American politics, and to be honest I really don’t care. He did the deed and must pay the price. If that means holing up in the Ecuadorian Embassy for the rest of his life without the chance to lay in the sun so be it! You made your bed sunshine (no pun intended) now you must sleep in it!


4 Responses to “Allow Assange to Sunbathe???”

  1. Sir

    The USA are quick to tell the World that US law takes precedence over Human Rights legislation. They did not sign up for a reason! If you believe Assange is safe if he goes to the USA… then believe away!

    Churchill was one of the HRA progenitors – sorry for stating that he invented/created it. That said, the history lesson (in your response) is not helpful here. The price we pay for having the core principals (the bits we like and need) is the fact that we now have bits of it that we don’t like.

    For what its worth, I think the HRA and its powers should only be used in the International Criminal Court and The European Court of Human Rights. And only in matters that are likely to impact on ENTIRE NATIONS/ETHNIC GROUPS WITHIN AN ENTIRE AND RELIGIOUS GROUPS WITHIN AN ENTIRE NATION. Matters relating to individual citizens within those borders that are civil and even criminal would have no Human Rights component/tangent.

    I was not castigating you. All I’m saying is The HRA continues to do good things all over the world. aND YOU KNOW IT DOES TOO. Lets promote its core ideals and play down its misuses. We will both feel better!



    • Hi Luke,
      Welcome back, its always nice to bandy back and forth opinions with people who feel strongly about a subject.
      Let me put a question to you. What do you think would happen if Assange suddenly died after he either surrendered to the USA for trial, or was handed over? There would be such an international outcry reverberating around the world and it would be headline news across the globe. It would damage American international relations for a very long time and would be something that would do major damage to them both economically and politically. Assange is a figure known to just about everyone, so I am very sure that even if he ends up in American hands he will be safe.
      I did also say, ‘surrendered’ to the US authorities, but of course he will not do that. He may be a fool, but not that big a fool! There is no evidence whatsoever that the Swedish government would hand him over to the Americans if they got their hands on him. He is accused of sexual assault, and who knows, he may or may not be guilty, but the only way anyone will find out is for him to face justice in Sweden. Do not forget that Sweden is a neutral country and is not even a member of NATO so it would be very hard for the USA to pressure them into handing him over as they have next to no trade with them either. Most people seem to forget that point.
      I will agree that the Human Rights Laws were inspired by Winston Churchill, but it was not he who did all the groundwork to see them become reality. His main work was the formation of the United Nations that replaced the then defunct League of Nations.
      All that aside, I see you are basically in agreement with me on the HCR! I have always said, and I repeated it to you, that the HCR is a necessary piece of legislation in today’s world. My only complaint about it is that it interferes too much in national justice systems. I agree wholeheartedly that it should base itself on matters: “that are likely to impact on ENTIRE NATIONS/ETHNIC GROUPS WITHIN AN ENTIRE AND RELIGIOUS GROUPS WITHIN AN ENTIRE NATION” to quote you. So you see, we are not all that far apart at all.
      In Britain we have had our own human rights legislation since 1689 when the English Bill of Rights was accepted into law. We do not need bureaucrats in Strasbourg telling us that criminals have more rights than their victims, or that we cannot deport proven terrorist, habitual immigrant criminals or illegal immigrants.
      I have never denied that the HCR does a lot of good and is an essential tool for life today, but it has reached the stage where it goes too far and too deep into a sovereign countries affairs. I sincerely hope that our current government has the balls to tell Strasbourg to go and get stuffed and reintroduce our own tried and tested legislation. That will wipe the smile off the face of all our smug HR lawyers!
      Keep Smiling!
      Best Regards,


  2. Not every one who is on the run is “escaping justice” as you put it. Some are escaping persecution.

    Mr Assange remains in fear of his life for the crime of “file sharing” and it is alleged that he sexually assaulted someone. A charge that he denies. The file sharing he admits, I think.

    You say that “who are you to judge?” but your entire blog above judges him. Don’t get me wrong – like you, I think he should confront his accusers while declaring his innocence on the sexual assault matter. But we both know that this isn’t what this is about. This is about who controls the use and flow of military and counter terrorism intelligence.

    Our American Cousins.

    It is to them that you should perhaps aim your criticisms. Mr Assange is afraid – and with some justification. I kind of agree with you that it was “unwise” to go public with the intelligence but being a fool is not (YET) a crime!!

    I’m more concerned with yet another attack by you on the Human Rights Act. (HRA). I’ve read some of your other blogs and it is a consistent theme. In one of your blogs it says you were in the RAF (I think). The Human Rights Act was the brainchild of Winston Churchill (I think). He was certainly one of its progenitors. What I’m saying is: you (kind of) fought for it (during your time in the Service) and it strikes me as odd that you (appear to) dislike it so much!

    Yes, the HRA is being misinterpreted in a ghastly way and Churchill must be turning in his grave to see these warped interpretations of what is (I believe) an honorable, well intentioned and effective piece of legislation.

    Deep down, you know it to be those things too.

    Mr Assange/The Ecuadorian Embassy’s misuse of the HRA is not the worst you and I have come across – Come on!!

    Maybe we can start a campaign that sees the HRA returning to its “core” principals and extract HR legislation from civil (and even some criminal) matters.



    • Hi Luke,
      Welcome back, and thanks for the comment. With regard to Assange ‘escaping persecution’ I cannot agree, for the case in Sweden has nothing whatsoever to do with the open case against him in the USA. Who can say if he is guilty of sexual assault, and of course he claims to be not guilty, don’t they all nowadays! He should answer that charge in a Swedish court. There is no evidence to date of an arrangement between Sweden and the USA to ‘hand him over’ once he surrenders to Swedish justice. That may or may not be just be a smokescreen generated by him, who knows. He must have known what the Americans would do once they knew what he was up to, so to me it was stupid act to begin with. Why he should be ‘in fear for his life’ I fail to see. The Americans merely want him to answer the charges against him in a court of law, not assassinate him.
      You say that I have ‘judged’ him all through the post, that is not true: He “continues to protest his innocence, and he may well be, who am I to judge, but if that is so let him prove it in court in Sweden”. All I said is that he should fight the case in Sweden and not hide behind the door of the Ecuadorian Embassy.
      The main thrust of this post is to highlight the ridiculous and flagrant mis-representation of the HCR in that he should be allowed time to ‘sunbathe’ as if it is a primary human right!. Be honest, what sort of stupidity is that? Do you honestly think such an argument is justified?
      You are dead wrong in assuming that I am against the HCR. I have said in previous posts that it absolutely essential in today’s world, and incidentally it was not Churchill who came up with the idea, he pushed through the United Nations itself. The Human Rights Laws were the result of work by the Human Rights Commission, under the chairmanship of former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt and was adopted by the Untied Nations in 1948 as a direct result of the atrocities committed during the Second World War.
      The original charter was a very necessary piece of legislation for the world after WW2, but has been added to and defiled ever since. There are too many loopholes for criminals to get away with crimes (I can quote you cases), and terrorists to avoid deportation because the HR laws are being twisted beyond recognition. That must mean something is badly wrong with the whole system. Yes, the HCR is necessary to try and prevent torture etc, but it has gone too far. I agree with you 100% that the HCR must be taken back to its core principals of defending those who cannot defend themselves. So please don’t castigate me for highlighting yet another HR farce.
      Stay Cool!
      Best Regards,


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: