tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post3994615377827847743..comments2023-12-29T00:08:21.051-08:00Comments on fear of a red planet: What Sun Yat-Sen has to tell us about the Assange caseGilman Grundyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06607416440240634159noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post-42702791396915602142012-09-13T19:40:50.716-07:002012-09-13T19:40:50.716-07:00Interesting parallels with Sun, G. thought you thr...Interesting parallels with Sun, G. thought you threaded em in quite neatly.<br /><br />While I understand your take on making hollow threats, in this day and age when governments hardly ever follow through on even campaign pledges, I don't think this can be called foolish. At least not in the sense that it will come back to bite them in the arse. <br /><br />Do you think much of the public understands or really cares about what's at stake here? This current admin, in particular, has got (and will get) away with much worse on issues that people really do care about, so why would they care about sounding off and then backpedalling on this?Jameshttp://thewritingbaron.com/puji-for-show-shanguang-for-dough-thoughnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post-66119607294991240212012-08-16T11:26:48.873-07:002012-08-16T11:26:48.873-07:00I think your question about the Swedes is justifie...I think your question about the Swedes is justified, but I don't understand the British government's threat.<br /><br />The Swedish bureaucracy doesn't want to make mistakes, and every careerist wants to excel. Maybe therefore, Sweden didn't simply send staff to Britain to question Assange there. They wanted to avoid a storm of indignation at home.<br /><br />Britain plays in a different league than Sweden. The country that fought against the European mainland's dictators during the past 250 years deserves more trust than the Cameron government. The government is just a flash in the pan. I'm sure that rule of laW and the British public, with a sense of justice, will make it impossible for the government to act on its threats. That's not great, but better than if the government acts in accordance with its threat.Tai Dehttp://taide.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post-6003023591813123112012-08-16T10:56:32.231-07:002012-08-16T10:56:32.231-07:00I think Sweden won't say much if Assange stays...I think Sweden won't say much if Assange stays in the Ecuadorian embassy for the rest of his life either, Foarp. I know - Assange enjoys cult status among his followers, and the heat from them may not be easy to take, either. But I believe that a principled stance - something like "we will live up to our obligations, but part of these obligations is respect for diplomatic immunity" - will convince <i>reasonable</i> people. That's all one can do.justrecentlyhttp://justrecently.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post-46933161367383808862012-08-16T10:49:02.222-07:002012-08-16T10:49:02.222-07:00I have to say I think you may be right, JR. There&...I have to say I think you may be right, JR. There's simply no way in which I can see making these kind of threats working. I'm a great believer in the idea that making threats one has no intention of carrying out is foolish - and that's exactly what is being done in this case.<br /><br />The 1987 act was brought in in reaction to a case where embassy staff sprayed the streets around them with machine gun fire, NOT to effect the arrest of someone wanted for extradition for questioning. The idea of using the act, or even threatening to use the act, is irresponsible.<br /><br />The other thing that troubles me about this case is - where are the Swedes? It is for them that we are ruining our reputation and expending our diplomatic capital, yet they have not said a word since Assange fled to the embassy. Just why should Britain take all the heat in this case? Have they nothing to say? Gilman Grundyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06607416440240634159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post-69323006417269725182012-08-16T10:28:55.960-07:002012-08-16T10:28:55.960-07:00I believe that just the mere threat to make use of...I believe that just the mere threat to make use of the 1984 act is a damp squib already, Foarp. Not even the East German government (during the 1989 refugee crisis) or the PRC government (in Fang Lizhi's and his wife's case, or in Chen Guangcheng's case) would cross this limit. I'm getting the impression that <a href="http://foarp.blogspot.de/2011/08/david-cameron-isnt-going-to-censor.html" rel="nofollow">the current government's attitude towards rules</a> becomes compromised as soon as such rules turn out to be somewhat inconvenient. I'm not sure if Blair was trustworthier, but I don't think that blunders like these would have happened to John Major.justrecentlyhttp://justrecently.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.com