I think that both parties to this asylum agreement are going to find that they've created a monster. The Ecuador embassy staff have had a non-paying guest since June, and the guest has nowhere to go, other than the confines of whatever embassy rooms are available to him.
The longer it goes on, the greater the frustration on both sides, and as media attention is diverted to other stories the 'friendship' factor inside the building is going to decrease.
In the end Assange will go to Sweden. It's a question of time. The Swedish authorities are adamant that they intend to question him on Swedish soil, and our government has given an undertaking that he will be extradited. Ecuador's case for granting asylum is based on its belief that Sweden will hand Assange over to the United States government, and that he would face life imprisonment or death there. The US has categorically denied that there has been any such agreement with Sweden, although it says it would certainly like to talk to him about the Wikileaks revelations.
You are quick to slam others who make assumptions. Exactly how do you know he is a non-paying guest after all he can just go online and transfer money from a bank account anywhere in the world to an ecudorian government one.
I called Assange a non-paying guest because he almost certainly is. His legal costs are - in his own words - already in excess of half a million pounds. His Swiss bank has frozen his assets because he gave a false residential address when opening the account. Mastercard, VISA, and The Bank of America have refused to have any further dealings with Wikileaks.
The chances are that Assange isn't exactly awash with cash at the moment.
In any case, what does that have to do with the issue of his asylum?
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.