"consular assistance" /= political asylum

And this "consular assistance" would consist of what exactly? They would, for example, help him pack his bags? Such assistance would not seem to be very helpful to him.

Also in the article:

Britain has angered Ecuador by suggesting it could invoke a domestic law allowing it to breach the usual rules and go in to arrest Mr Assange.

This would challenge a fundamental principle of the diplomatic system, and the threat has left Britain in unchartered legal waters.

I wouldn't trust the Australian consul. I haven't heard a word from the Australian government expressing their objection to Britain's threats to the Ecuadorian embassy (I would be interested if someone has heard of such). If Britain stretches the normal rules regarding embassies they will be putting their own embassies in danger, and probably ours as well. I don't think they will take over the embassy, but even the threat to do so puts into question the security of any country's embassy.

I see nothing strange with Assange rejecting their offer of help.

for help, and when help is offered he turns it down: it's drama almost as gripping as Shakespeare

Do you know him personally? Curious why your aggressive involvement.

The IT trade publications and blogs have been covering this a lot more closely and carefully than the places you keep citing. It really helps when you have activists on sites like DU in other countries who know the technology, but also know who you should and should not trust for your information.

For some of the background in UK and in Sweden you need to go back to pre Iraq war, just like here. (With maybe a side trip with Xenu and the Clams, and a review of Swedish copyright law).

I know it can be difficult, but learning more and gaining a modicum of humility can help one get up to speed on a topic.

a short excerpt, from a current Australian press piece (indicating that Assange has declined offers of consular help from the Australians), constitutes evidence of my ignorance and lack of humility

Since you asked me for an explanation, since I know you locally, and in the spirit of understanding, let me see if I can help:

In my humble opinion, you have been running roughshod over others on this and related aspects of this story, bordering on bullying. For some reason, you seem really caught up in this story.

You have continued to post the most strident "official" positions even when multiple posters have responded and provided links to reputable alternative narratives which are better supported by the available and extensive facts, the bulk of which are in evidence in public documents. You know, the kinds of things DU normally deems credible.

Your posts have seemed to mirror those of disinformation campaigns by official and quasi-gov / political entities in the US and abroad.

So no, this isn't about just one post. Hope I have helped clarify how your posts have appeared to me. We can talk about this further in private, if you like.

One minute they're saying they're limited in what assistance they can offer, and the next they're saying they offered some and it was knocked back. What sort of 'assistance' was it, anyway? For all we know, they turned up and offered to personally hand him over to the US and bypass Sweden totally...

The Australian govt isn't doing enough to help him, and apart from that, their behaviour right from the start was disgusting and they were more interested in sucking up to the US than they were in providing assistance to Assange.

What would it take for Australia to ask for a Swedish assurance that Assange won't be extradited to the U.S. if he were to go there to talk to the prosecutors?

It's comforting to know that the Australian government will only stick up for its citizens if there's some political mileage to be gained. Melinda Taylor got a very different response, but there was no risk of offending the U.S. then.

The Australian Government have stated that they wont interfere due to the laws of UK & Equador.They havent said that they WOULDN'T HELP,but they wont interfere with the laws of the land.
I guess that this means that they have done what they can.........or HAVE they