Originally Posted by buddyholly
It is only the Ecuadorans who have claimed that Britain has threatened to storm the embassy and ''savagely beat'' the people inside. And of course they haven't, but a lot of people seem to want to believe this.
I read the conditions that Ecuador agreed to, and Britain has the right to revoke the status of the embassy, in the event that the building is used for other than consular business. It is not something made for Ecuador, it is normal procedure. If the embassy status was revoked, then it would not be extradition.
BREAKING NEWS: Brits just released a statement that they are committed to a negotiated settlement. How disappointing for the rabble.
Yes, we have the right to revoke the status of the embassy. That doesn't mean that is is a consequence-free action, if it is done for what to many people appear to be nakedly political reasons. It weakens the sanctity of embassies in general - nothing to stop other countries from following our lead and compromising the ability of embassies to do their jobs in difficult situations and circumstances. That risk all seems a bit of a high price to pay for the seizure of one man who hasn't even been charged with anything yet - when there are clear alternatives available that Sweden has apparently refused to explore.