Ecuador Wanted To Make Julian Assange a Diplomat and Send Him To Moscow (arstechnica.com) 130
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Last year, Ecuador attempted to deputize WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange as one of its own diplomats and send him to Russia, according to a Friday report by Reuters. Citing an "Ecuadorian government document," which the news agency did not publish, Assange apparently was briefly granted a "special designation" to act as one of its diplomats, a privilege normally granted to the president for political allies. However, that status was then withdrawn when the United Kingdom objected. The Associated Press reported earlier in the week that newly-leaked documents showed that Assange sought a Russian visa back in 2010. WikiLeaks has vehemently denied that Assange did so.
Re: (Score:1)
Or presidents named Clinton
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Why Russia? (Score:1)
Immunity only applies if the other nation grants it, and usually when a diplomat is involved in a crime (especially Espionage) they will have their status revoked, their Visa cancelled, and at the very least get kicked out of the country.
Re: (Score:1)
Expelled diplomats are no longer welcome on the soil of the nation that hosts their embassy. While they can stay in the embassy, they can't leave the embassy without the threat of deportation. In those circumstances, especially since expelling diplomats is usually a public show of national annoyance, the diplomats simply leave of their own accord. Often quite rapidly. The time granted to leave varies, but it can be very short. During that time the expelled diplomats can leave unabaited and unhindered. I ima
Re: (Score:1)
It sounds like Ecuador wants to be rid of this guy pretty bad.
"I know, let's make him the ambassador to Russia and see how long it takes for him to get a polonium cocktail."
"Or, we could take him to Dave & Busters and slip out while he's playing ski-ball."
"How about if we move our embassy and just not tell him?"
"No, the Russia thing sounds good. Let's go with that one."
Re: (Score:2)
They could just invite the UK police in to arrest him.
Re: (Score:1)
True, but Ecuador can expel Assange at any time for no reason at all. He is not an Ecuador citizen and they have no moral, civic or legal obligation to give him refuge.
I see thins as a ploy to get Assange back to his true masters, but the UK didn't play along.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Humbug (Score:1, Insightful)
There is such an active, concerted disinformation campaign surrounding Assange and other government leakers, it's impossible to tell where the lies end and the truth begins. Could be true. Could be yet another smear. Anyone who thinks they know for sure hasn't been paying much attention.
Re:Humbug (Score:4, Interesting)
Well...Wikileaks is not exactly an equal opportunity leaker. In retrospect there's no higher morality to it's actions or the "materials" released.
The value is in creating chaos. In the Clinton case, in order to believe there was substantive criminal activity, one must believe that the whole of the FBI and intelligence community were in cahoots with Clinton.
It's not like other true leaks like Snowden or the Pentagon Papers. Those were acts of conscience which led to at least some change.
Even in the McCarthy era the real nuance in his actions was not apparent until years later. If you don't get it now- give it ten years.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Personally, I found the insight into how the Hillary Campaign took over the DNC and rigged the primaries, but that's just me. If you find it chaotic to have a fair and balanced voting system that actually allows US Citizens to have a say in the affairs of their country over that of globalist corporations, then maybe you are the problem. Maybe it is your morals that need a check.
Which just goes to show that leaks don't equal insight.
What the leaks showed was that:
a) Lots of people in the DNC were huge fans of Clinton and skeptical of Sanders. There was certainly a lot of networking on her part, but the DNC was still independent.
b) The overwhelming majority of people in the DNC tried to run the primary in a fair manner (despite their personal preference).
c) In a handful of instances some people did tip the scales to Clinton.
d) There was a lot of pressure for other prospective candid
Re: Humbug (Score:4, Insightful)
There was enough foul play uncovered that the chairiman of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, was forced to resign from the position and be replaced, during the height of the campaign when such a move was extremele disruptive. You can try to smooth that over with words, but there was big-time rotten activity and we should be grateful it was exposed.
Re: (Score:2)
Great argument using whataboutism.
I'm not a Democrat myself, but I know plenty of them, and most of the ones I know aren't happy about how Sanders was treated, and in no way shape of form believe that he was treated fairly or that the primary wasn't in the bag for Clinton, irregardless of how the primary vote came out.
Pointing at Trump doesn't improve your defense of the DNC. It just shows you still don't get why Clinton lost. Let me give you a clue. A lot of those Sanders supporters stayed home on election
Re: (Score:2)
The DNC made mistakes but they have acknowledged them and are doing something about them.
The only mistake the DNC is working to fix is getting caught. There have been no changes and no sincere calls for changes which would improve the situation; those in charge want it to be the way it is.
The Republicans made their own mistake. I expect them to work harder in the future to make sure someone like Trump does not win their primary election. Maybe they can copy what the DNC did successfully.
Re: Humbug (Score:1)
#WalkAway is yet another Russian effort to dupe the more gullible members of the American electorate.
However even the terminally stupid have realized that Trump is Putin's patsy, turning to obsequious jelly in his presence. Some patriots still care about that.
Re: Humbug (Score:1)
He is and always was a Russian shill and worked as part of their propaganda machine. He has zero moral high ground.
Re: Humbug (Score:3)
Russia isn't even a primary foreign policy opponent any longer. We should be looking at China and their imperialistic belt-and-road initiative, not fretting over musty cold war memes.
Re: Humbug (Score:2)
He was Mr Wonderful when he was making Dubya look bad but how dare he interfere with the coronation of Queen Hillary!
Re: (Score:2)
Snowden and Ellsberg disagree. Funny how that doesn't count for anything.
Re:Humbug (Score:5, Interesting)
> The value is in creating chaos. In the Clinton case, in order to believe there was substantive criminal activity, one must believe that the whole of the FBI and intelligence community were in cahoots with Clinton.
No, it's more than that, there's still too many people looking at the whole Russia-Trump-Clinton thing through the eyes of US politics, let's be clear here, the morning Wikileaks leaked the damaging material on Clinton, Nigel Farage attempted to sneak into the Ecuadorian embassy to meet with Julian Assange - the US House Intelligence Committee has since received intelligence that this was to provide Assange with a thumb drive and that Farage was a Russian conduit:
https://www.theguardian.com/po... [theguardian.com]
https://www.france24.com/en/20... [france24.com]
If you're looking purely through the lens of "My candidate won, you're just bitter" then you're missing the point here. Let's be absolutely clear - Nigel Farage is incredibly friendly with a guy in British politics called Arron Banks. Arron Banks is a guy who no one had ever heard of until he dramatically appeared on the British political scene around 2015 with a story about how he was going to defect from being a major Conservative party donor to being a UKIP donor, despite the fact no one in the Conservative party had any idea who he was, he suddenly had £1million pounds to dramatically donate to UKIP. Since then he has come under investigation, because no one can explain the source of all his wealth as it's hidden incredibly well behind a cascade of fake businesses in places like the Cayman Islands which are well known conduits of Russian money. Of course, you could fairly trivially dismiss this as paranoia if it weren't for the fact that Arron Banks is married to Ekaterina Paderina. Who you ask? Someone a Russian defector described as one of their greatest intelligence assets, someone who had an affair with a much older MP who just happened to be in charge of one of the constituencies where Britain's nuclear submarines are housed:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/ne... [telegraph.co.uk]
https://www.thedailybeast.com/... [thedailybeast.com]
On top of that, Farage has consistently refused to condemn Russia even when it annexed Crimea, he has attended Russia's far right convention in St. Petersburg where a number of far right anti-EU parties in Europe were granted support and funding from Russian state entities:
https://themoscowtimes.com/art... [themoscowtimes.com]
So at this point, if anyone things it's about Clinton or Trump, they really are failing to see the bigger picture. There's a massive web here with ample evidence trailing all the way back to Putin's doorstep, and what's more, it stems from before Trump was even a US political candidate at all, which in itself highlights the fact it's got nothing to do with "bitter Hillary" supporters or whatever justification people like to use for refusing to acknowledge it.
At this point, if you really don't think Russia is involved in interfering in Western politics in an incredibly serious manner, and if you don't think Putin had anything to do with Brexit, Trump, Hungary's Jobbik, France's NF, Greece's Golden Dawn and so on and so forth then you're in denial over such an overwhelmingly large body of evidence that you genuinely only can be either pro-Russian and anti-Western, or the kind of useful idiot that these kind of intelligence operations rely on in the first place.
Assange and Wikileaks are just one part of a massive web
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, Grasshopper-San, you have not been listening to the truth Voice of Truth, Fox. The FBI and the intelligence community are in an unholy cabal to support liberal Democrats and the destruction of the U.S. by replacing it with...with...people from BENGHAZI!!! Now suck on the flavorful Popsicle and follow Dear Leader in Prayer:
The Lord is my Shepherd,
I shall not think.
Jesus was a conservative,
Off to Hell our
Re: (Score:1)
You just downplayed the Clinton leaks AND tried to rehabilitate Joseph McCarthy! Bravo, well done sir!
Re: (Score:2)
Well...Wikileaks is not exactly an equal opportunity leaker. In retrospect there's no higher morality to it's actions or the "materials" released.
At this point it is extremely clear that Assange is nothing more than one of Putin's puppets. Wikileaks is nothing more than an attempt to weaken the soft power that western democracies project. All part of a grand plan to rebuild the Russian empire with a Putin dynasty.
Re: (Score:2)
In the Clinton case, in order to believe there was substantive criminal activity, one must believe that the whole of the FBI and intelligence community were in cahoots with Clinton.
That is simply not necessary. If the past years revelations of FBI political activity have shone anything it is that rank and file FBI workers are pretty much willing to allow their political leaders and upper level management to do anything they want without interfering.
Or another words, regular agents concentrate on chasing real spies and criminals and ignore their managers actions in leveraging FBI assets to spy on and attack opposition party members. They do not actively support those actions, but they
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone knows wikileaks is not an equal opportunity leaker but only are liar would make it seem bad. Yes, they check all the information coming in for veracity, validity of course and some of the information is left out if it puts individuals at risk and yes, this does take time and the most interesting and least risky stuff goes first. Very scummy bit of propaganda, ohh yeah not true leaks, not one leak of course but thousands of them, all needing to be checked before being published.
Yeah the deep scum s
Dipshit talking points (Score:2)
You do realize "equal opportunity leaker" is a contradiction in terms, yes? Wikileaks is dependent on the information that is leaked to them. If you want them to publish something, stop chugging hatorade supplied by the deep state long enough to leak something to them, or hack somebody so you have said something.
Re: (Score:2)
Ecuador was (Score:3)
Just my 2 cents
Re: (Score:1)
Your post lacks the part where you explain what it is that you believe they might have gotten out of it, and how.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously an entire country struggles with food for one person.
No surprise (Score:1, Troll)
Of course the embassy it trying to find a loophole to get rid of him without him being murdered by the USA. They'd dress him up as a DHL delivery guy if they thought that would work. Hardly news.
Phillip.
Re: (Score:3)
You are confusing the USA with Russia, they're the ones with the poisonous assassins. The USA would just turn him over to Fox for a bit of light-hearted torture. A few days watching that would turn him into silly-putty.
Oh Lord (Score:1)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, you didn't. (Score:2)
As much as I "admire" your transparent attempt at concern trolling.
Bluntly, you're projecting. If you knew you were on the shit list of every Western intelligence agency for exposing their dirty laundry - and on the snatch-and-grab list of every other intelli
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course not, that would wreck the concern trolling. You know, where you claim to support someone or something but have all these Concerns about how they are doing it.
Still fucking that chicken? [urbandictionary.com] When did Assange claim to be the ultimate journalist, carved in marble by the gods themselves on Mt Olympus?
So he's gonna laugh at Murtaugh (Score:2)
Then hold up his papers and yell "DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY!" before getting a bullet in the brainpan?
https://youtu.be/kwC_IaY3BmY [youtu.be]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Wasn't he accused of having sex without a condom after having sex with a condom?
That may legally be rape in some countries, but I wouldn't put it in the same boat as forcible non-consensual sex or sex with a party who cannot consent.
I still think he's a narcissistic asshole, but I don't want to lose sight of facts/reality.
Pretty sure rolling over in the morning and having unprotected sex with a sleeping person that did not want to have unprotected sex with you earlier can be rape, unless you're married, basically in any country with marriage laws... Otherwise, what's the logic, you sinned once, so you deserve it?
Re: US should nominate him for SCOTUS (Score:1)
Sleeping? Protected or not, that's just plain rape.
Re: (Score:2)
Who are you going to believe?
The people who released him initially - before the USA went on a fishing expedition to find a way to get him to the USA no matter what.
PS: An Interpol arrest warrant issued for a crime committed in a single country? That's corruption at the highest level.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
What's your problem with Insane Clown Posse fans?