Tweet
3:10 PM EST Former Spanish judge and now attorney for Assange Baltasar Garzon tells El Pais, a Spanish newspaper, that UK should abide by its “diplomatic obligations” under the Refugee Convention and let him have safe passage to Ecuador. He suggests the case could be taken to the International Court of Justice if the British government refuses to allow passage. He also criticized the threat to “invade” the embassy, where Assange has now been holed up for nearly two months.
3:07 PM EST WikiLeaks Press now has a non-Google translation of the statement made by Ecuador laying out the foundation of the country’s decision to grant asylum.
3:03 PM EST Threats from UK against Ecuador’s embassy over Julian Assange being granted asylum to be discussed by representatives of the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) and the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA) this weekend.
3:00 PM EST Tweets from the Center for Constitutional Rights:
11:53 PM EST British Foreign Office has issued a statement in response to the decision. Here’s a particularly significant section of the statement:
…It is a matter of regret that instead of continuing these discussions they have instead decided to make today’s announcement. It does not change the fundamentals of the case. We will not allow Mr Assange safe passage out of the UK, nor is there any legal basis for us to do so. The UK does not accept the principle of diplomatic asylum. It is far from a universally accepted concept: the United Kingdom is not a party to any legal instruments which require us to recognise the grant of diplomatic asylum by a foreign embassy in this country. Moreover, it is well established that, even for those countries which do recognise diplomatic asylum, it should not be used for the purposes of escaping the regular processes of the courts. And in this case that is clearly what is happening…
11:45 PM EST Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights and also a member of WikiLeaks’ legal team tells Firedoglake that asylum overrides the effort to prosecute Assange for being a journalist of WikiLeaks.
If you’re given asylum because you’ve flown persecution from a place, obviously it’s about they’re going to prosecute you and that’s why you’re given asylum. So, clearly asylum overrides the prosecution.
He also says the “whole purpose of asylum to prevent them from being persecuted for their political opinions.” Why? The law is that he “can’t be sent to persecutors.” UK should not take any action that would lead to political persecution.
12:10 PM EST Note to journalists: Julian Assange has not officially or formally been charged with a crime ever. The Washington Post and other media organizations continue to print deliberate disinformation. It is deliberate because media organizations various countries have been printing corrections throughout the past year (at least). WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, his spokesperson and his legal team have tried to correct the record many, many times. The press keeps inserting “charges” into reports.
So, a tip—All reporters or journalists proofread. Every time you have to write a story on Julian Assange, get into the habit of going back to replace the word “charges” with “allegations.” If you take your commitment to fact-based reporting seriously, this is what you must do.
12:05 PM EST Mark Weisbrot, who has been supportive of the request, writes for The Guardian:
…the UK government made an unprecedented threat to invade Ecuador’s embassy if Assange is not handed over. Such an assault would be so extreme in violating international law and diplomatic conventions that it is difficult to even find an example of a democratic government even making such a threat, let alone carrying it out…
He adds:
Ecuador’s decision to grant political asylum to Assange was both predictable and reasonable. But it is also a ground-breaking case that has considerable historic significance.
Weisbrot’s column can be read in its entirety here.
11:50 AM EST Andy Greenberg of Forbes on the former UK ambassador who suggests a “raid” of the Ecuador embassy is coming
11:45 AM EST Sweden summons Ecuador ambassador
11:40 AM EST I am scheduled to go on the BBC’s “World Have Your Say” program at 6 pm UK time (that is about 1 pm EST/noon CT).
11:30 AM EST Without being glib, Al Jazeera English outlines some “options” that Assange has now that he has been granted asylum, which include: fleeing to an airport, being designated as a diplomat, using a “diplomatic bag” and remaining indefinitely at the embassy.
11:20 AM EST A BBC home affairs correspondent suggests the following—which is factually incorrect because he has been charged with no crime:
Political asylum is not available to anyone facing a serious non-political crime – such as the allegations levelled against Mr Assange.
But does his new status mean he can now leave his Swedish problems behind? No. Asylum does not equal immunity from prosecution – and Julian Assange needs safe passage through UK territory that he won’t get.
Mr Assange knows he can’t leave without risking arrest by officers waiting outside. The police can’t enter the embassy unless the government revokes its status.
11:00 AM EST Juan Cole’s fine column on “Ayatollah Cameron” threatening to “invade” the Ecuador embassy over Assange
10:45 AM EST WikiLeaks lawyer Michael Ratner appeared on “Democracy Now!” to react to the announcement. In the segment (below), he says, “The British ought to just back off and the US ought to just back off.” And adds, “For the British to say that they are going to go in to the embassy to get someone who has been granted asylum, would turn the refugee convention on asylum completely on its head. … [Assange] has the right to leave that embassy, get on the plane and go to Ecuador. That’s the law.”
10:35 AM EST Here’s the New York Times coverage of the announcement. The Times reports the British Foreign Office was “disappointed by the Ecuadorean announcement but remained committed to a negotiated outcome to the standoff.” The Times also decides to rehash details from the feud between former WikiLeaks staff member Daniel Domscheit-Berg and Assange:
Daniel Domscheit-Berg, who ran WikiLeaks with Mr. Assange until the two had a falling-out in 2010, accused Mr. Assange in a memoir of staying for several months, uninvited, and of abusing his cat.
In an interview with The New York Times in early 2011, Mr. Domscheit-Berg added that Mr. Assange had refused to flush the toilet during his entire stay. Mr. Assange has countered that Mr. Domscheit-Berg, and others who have given personal accounts along these lines, are motivated by malice.
No real assessment of how astounding it is that the UK would threaten Ecuador with entering the country’s embassy to arrest Assange. Just a recycling of all the talking points that typically come from people who only have condescending viewpoints to offer on Assange.
10:30 AM EST Ecuador President Rafael Correa said on Twitter as the decision was about to be announced that no country would be allowed to scare the country.
10:25 AM EST Here’s Assange on June 24 indicating he would likely go to Sweden to face questioning if diplomatic guarantees were offered that he would not be handed over to the United States.
9:45 AM EST Center for Constitutional Rights applauds Ecuador’s decision:
We applaud Ecuador for granting asylum to Julian Assange. Ecuador’s action rightly offers protection to a journalist and publisher who faces persecution from the U.S. It thereby strengthens the global commitment to human rights, including government accountability and freedom of the press. We hope that Assange’s contributions to a robust democratic society are belatedly recognized by the U.S., which prides itself in its commitment to a free press.
Granting asylum is a humanitarian act and the UN General Assembly has unanimously declared that it should not be construed as unfriendly by other countries. The U.S., Sweden and the U.K. have adopted and reiterated this very principle many times. It is imperative, therefore, that no diplomatic consequences should befall Ecuador over this decision.
We are deeply troubled by the reported U.K. threats to storm the Ecuadoran Embassy and arrest Assange, in clear violation of the Vienna Convention’s protection of the inviolability of sovereign embassy properties, and by the menacing police presence outside the embassy. We call on the British government to explicitly and immediately confirm that it will honor international and diplomatic commitments.
9:40 AM EST Full report now posted on the announced decision. It includes the critical points Ecuador made to support the decision and all the treaties, conventions and principles of international law (in addition to domestic law in Ecuador), which give the country the right to grant Julian Assange refugee status.
9:03 AM EST Ecuador, after providing a detailed background on the decision, stated:
…the Government of Ecuador, true to its tradition of protecting those who seek refuge in its territory or on the premises of diplomatic missions, has decided to grant diplomatic asylum to citizen’s Assange, based on the application submitted to the President of the Republic, by written communication, dated London, June 19, 2012, and supplemented by letter dated at London on June 25, 2012, for which the Government of Ecuador, after a fair and objective assessment of the situation described by Mr. Assange, according to their own words and arguments, endorsed the fears of the appellant, and assumes that there are indications that it may be presumed that there may be political persecution, or could occur such persecution if measures are not taken timely and necessary to avoid it…
The Ecuador government then added its hope that the British government will “value” the “justice and righteousness” Ecuador’s position and offer “safe passage guarantees necessary and relevant to the refugee situation” as soon as possible. Ecuador also pledged to maintain “excellent ties of friendship and mutual respect.” So, Ecuador does not wish for this to precipitate diplomatic crisis nor does it think there is any reason that the UK should make this a crisis.
9:00 AM EST In Spanish, here is what appears to be the full statement that was just delivered by Ecuador on the decision to grant asylum.
8:45 AM EST The official announcement has been delivered. Assange is granted political asylum in Ecuador.
8:37 AM EST Patino is describing what Ecuador did prior to the decision. High-level diplomatic talks were held with the United Kingdom, Sweden and the US. Sweden was approached and asked to ensure there’d be an open legal process if Assange were to be extradited.
8:33 AM EST RT is streaming the announcement with English translation here.
8:30 AM EST Foreign Minister says Assange will not have fair trial if he goes to US. “Ecuador is a free and democratic state not subject to external tutelage,” he said.
8:25 AM EST Ecuador Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino is delivering Ecuador’s announcement on decision right now. Patino is making clear Ecuador is a sovereign country. The threat the UK made against Ecuador is something the country takes seriously. He adds, ”
8:10 AM EST Here’s a photo from Bianca Jagger of the police arresting Julian Assange supporters over the past few hours:
Original Post
The country of Ecuador is about to make an announcement on whether to grant WikiLeaks founder and editor-in-chief Julian Assange’s asylum request. Rumors on what that decision will be have been announced, but Ecuador President Rafael Correa and Ecuador Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino have not made any official statements on a final decision.
In the late afternoon, Ecuador foreign minister Ricardo Patino made a stunning allegation during a press conference in Ecuador. He claimed the British government had threatened Ecuador over WikiLeaks founder & editor-in-chief Julian Assange, who has sought political asylum from the country and been holed up in the embassy for over fifty days.
The Ecuador government released a letter containing this “threat.” The letter suggested that under the UK Diplomatic & Consular Premises Act of 1987 it could revoke the diplomatic immunity that the Ecuador embassy in London enjoys. This would make it possible for UK authorities to storm the embassy and force Ecuador to hand over Assange. To this, Patino declared, “We’re not a British colony. UK threat to storm embassy would be hostile and force us to respond.”
The UK government said in response to this allegation, “We have an obligation to extradite Mr Assange and it is only right that we give Ecuador the full picture,” and, “We are still committed to reaching a mutually acceptable solution.” The Ecuador embassy in London issued a statement, “We are deeply shocked by British government’s threats against the sovereignty of the Ecuadorian Embassy and their suggestion that they may forcibly enter the embassy.” And, “Instead of threatening violence against the Ecuadorian Embassy the British Government should use its energy to find a peaceful resolution to this situation which we are aiming to achieve.”
Ecuador called for an emergency meeting of the Organization of American States (OAS) and Union of South American Nations to discuss this “threat” against a Latin American country’s embassy by the UK. A handful supporters gathered outside the embassy late in the night. Metropolitan police began to intensify their presence around the embassy and moved police vans up to the side entrance. A couple officers were stationed at the embassy entrance as well.
For yesterday’s complete live blog on the standoff, go here.
Firedoglake will now be live blogging developments on the announcement, which is expected to be presented at 7 am Ecuador time. That means the announcement can be expected about 8 am ET/7 am CT (United States).
82 Comments
Arrrgh! I can’t get the video to work.
“We’re not a British colony.”….Hmmm. An interesting thought. To whose colony do we belong or whose estate? We, the unwashed mob of commoners (Hoover called us commonists!) are thought of as serfs by the masters of the earth. Where are the tumbrels?
For those saying mainstream isn’t covering it, on the notification of the announcement here, I went to CNN.com, US version. It’s a banner of breaking news that the asylum has been granted. So there is coverage going on – whether they’re telling the whole story about the British trying to bully Ecuador, I can’t tell. But at least it’s there.
YES!!!!!!!
Reporting on CNN minutes ago.
Go Ecuador! Go Wikileaks! Go Assange!
And, yeah, I thought earlier: “Hmmmm. Maybe the Brits just overplayed a tad. I wonder how Ecuador will feel about having their embassy stormed …. among other things ….”
Now the question is will the Brits follow through and dig Julian out?
Boxturtle (3-2 says they were bluffing)
I have only been listening to CNN, when I heard them telegraphing “coming up .. we’ll bring you the announcement live …”
I did understand from their script that Ecuador was being bullied. So they gave enough info to get that conclusion. For me, anyway.
Came right to FDL knowing there would be more here of course!
It’s hard to imagine they would follow through on such a threat. The consequences would be quite serious both now and in the future in terms of how diplomatic immunity and embassy sovereignty would be treated.
Bluffing will end poorly for them (and they should have thought of that before) … but the alternative is an international blowup, me thinks!
The live feed from RT was quite good, although the translator had a little trouble keeping up ; )
Especially when it’s patently obvious that Cameron’s doing this to please the US.
And now CNN has moved on to (other) entertainment programming, of course. Par. Or maybe they got a “call.”
I was only on-line – not able to listen to the feed.
Yup, exactly. I think I owe you a beverage of your choice!
Morning panel discussion on CNN!
Exactly. The whole thing is such a sham. If Sweden actually gave a damn about the sexual assault allegations, as opposed to doing the bidding of the US, then it would have been quite simple to offer the necessary assurances of no extradition. But they refused, as did the UK to offer the same.
I suppose if one finds any comfort in that it is that neither the UK or Sweden were willing to flat out lie to Ecuador. So I guess they feel some compulsion to observe a few of the social niceties.
Good for Ecuador!
The US and Great Britain now need to be told that they do NOT get to “play” by rules separate and above every other nation, especially when it comes to international law …
It would be a good and proper thing for the UN to dare to do so.
If Great Britain is willing to attack the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, then there will be no doubt as to THEIR respect for the Rule of Law.
As the US and its “friendly nations” seek to make secret more and more, they transparently reveal their true hegemonic and tyrannical purpose.
Such nations are no longer, in any way, legitimate, they are merely violent Machiavellian “expediencies”, masquerading as civilized states.
And human beings around the world, even in the United States, cannot help but take note of this truth, and the implications therein.
Thank you, Kevin.
I hope that your calm and reasoned coverage of events and personalities, as this pregnant moment unfolds, will inspire further reason and circumspection, especially in certain “high places” … a forlorn hope it might well be, but there it is, nonetheless.
DW
Geez, the US gets to pay a few thousand dollars to the families of a couple of guys killed by Raymond Davis and a murderer gets a get out of jail free card.
Couldn’t Julian just send some flowers to the operatives who accused him of consensual sex not to their liking, and all this hoopla go away?
Really Britain? Have you no dignity?
Good news. And it looks like Sweden would NOT agree to no extradition.
@ggreenwald KEY FACT HERE: Ecuador FM: we tried to get Sweden to agree to no extradition to US in exchange for Assange going to Sweden – they said NO
At this hour another cup of coffee is always welcome ; )
The UK is in a real bind now. Should be interesting to watch them writhe for a bit. But then what? Will they throw caution to the wind and invade the embassy or will they relent and tell the US to get over it? Hard to say.
I saw something yesterday about how Brazil is planning for a stimulus package to improve infrastructure and to boost its flagging economy. Today Ecuador is carrying the banner of human rights. Might the 21st century become the South American century, while we and the EU crater into banana republics beholden to our transnational corporate masters?
I am very impressed with Ecuador’s handling of all of this ~ especially the (saavy) request for assurances and followthrough on the response.
Sweden’s admission is key. Ecuador has added substantively to the discussion by pressing this issue.
Glenn Greenwald tweeted:
KEY FACT HERE: Ecuador FM: we tried to get Sweden to agree to no extradition to US in exchange for Assange going to Sweden – they said NO
Thanks Kevin.
Oh I’m sure passage will be arrange. But not until the snipers have been put in place.
Sliding a fresh hot cup of java down the bar to you!
South America rocks.
Whoops, JeffC beat me to it.
Anyway, good for Ecuador! Assange continues to embarrass western governments. I bet they want him now more than ever.
Thanks : )
The Guardian reports that the UK still intends to arrest Assange. We’ll see…
Invading embassies is wrong when Iran does it, but somehow okay when the UK threatens to do it.
The U.S. officially became a “banana republic” on 11/13/63.
Whoa. So, they aren’t quitting and at least continuing the propaganda for now. Perhaps they are following Script A from CNN ~ wall-to-wall coverage of UK-US exceptionalism in “getting their man.”
CNN has added shots of protesters being dragged away by police ~ presumably in front of the embassy.
Indeed.
that is a key point
if they wanted to bring on us a police state with an excuse, this excuse is thin
Clearly, Ecuador is behaving in a calm and reasoned fashion,
Let us see if Great Britain and the US are able to rise to a similar level of maturity and evidence rational and mutual respect for international law.
BTW, phred, ’tis wonderful to “see” you here.
DW
it wouldn’t be wrong when Iran did it if our president asked them to do it though
From the Guardian liveblog, 14:04 BST
You’re joking…right ?
Hahahahahahaha… You have an excellent sense of humor DW ; )
And it’s good to see you, too : )
Very nice.
Wikileaks continues, even now, to spearhead getting the truth and hypocrisy exposed. It’s so hopeful.
We have to follow the laaaaaaaawwwww!!!!!!
Maybe I’ve watched too many modern-day spy movies, but I was kind of hoping JA had slipped out of there Sunday night during the citywide fireworks and hubbub of the closing of the 2012 Olympics and made his way to a ship. Party of four, including a white woman JA’s height wearing a bonnet, pulls up to embassy in a diplomat’s car. Fifteen minutes later, they leave with JA decked out in her clothes and bonnet. Lol, I know, too many movies…
Ever heard of Fizbin? Replaced the former set of laws awhile back… ; )
Isn’t invading another nation’s embassy an act of war ?
On the down side, he’ll have to sit in Ecuador the rest of his life.
I think that the UK wants Assange silenced as much as the US, and for the same reasons.
this is a good time to review the charges against Assange as examined by Naiomi Wolff: http://ferrada-noli.blogspot.com/2011/02/karl-rove-sweden-and-eight-major.html
Beauty! Laughing so hard I am crying. Shatner! Ahead of his time.
Here’s an idea: Assange is playing too!
Minor details, surely.
And that’s what gives me hope ; )
There are worse places …. like legal limbo in the US during the GWOT.
Me too. It’s an intriguing idea for this moment of celebration. I do believe he is smart enough. I didn’t see the request for asylum coming, but I was demoralized by the last “legal” ruling.
Besides ~ I have heard the Ecuador is a beautiful country. Even more beautiful today!
Indeed. But it goes beyond Assange… When governments stop playing by the rules, then what is to prevent the citizenry from following suit? There is a reason a “level playing field” is an essential aspect to a stable society. Tilt things too far and things will become unstable.
Excellent point. Lesser situations have set off major confrontations in the past.
Absolutely!! Those who manipulate the laws don’t care about this though. I remember writing maybe 2 years ago, the “rule of law” was dead. Over. Done.
At some point, there *may* be consequences. It’s hard to believe ….
Britain for sure is bluffing, I don’t think they want to go the way of entering Ecuadorian embassy. They will cause themselves even greater damage, since Britain commits many more criminal acts overseas than other countries. It is obviously letting its national ego get in the way of clear thinking. On the other hand, why would Britain get so worked up over one person? So there must be truth to the fact that it was all a plot to send JA to the U.S. However, they might have worked out some sort of deal where all the parties, including the U.S. sign an agreement that JA cannot be sent to the U.S. Obviously, Sweden refused to interview him in the U.K.But if they were keen on reaching an agreement that would have guaranteed that Assange would not be sent to the U.S. They could have also worked out a 3rd country where Assange might have been interviewed. But the entire incident shows that Britain probably made some sort of deal with the U.S., in my mind there is no doubt, or else why would they get wo worked up over it?
Yes, Julian Assange is killing Americans with his “leaks”. He must be terminated and taught a lesson, or rather any truth teller must be taught a lesson.
To stop the leaks, there is a a new PsyOp against the American people. Surprise, surprise, it is run by “retired retroactively” spies, SEALS, and Bushie War Criminals.
edit.
“When governments stop playing by the rules, then what is to prevent the citizenry from following suit?”
Tanks? Hollow-nosed bullets?
Thanks, that explains a lot.
The US wants Assange locked down in the US: that’s my belief. The UK shares secrets with the US, is bullied by the US, and has been threatened by the US for “letting the US” down on key international issues in the past. (For example, the UK has let some information about US torture get out publicly from GWOT victims now residing in the UK.)
It’s complicated. And complicated by the ego of the current UK government. And the pressures of the current situation. Of course, the UK has fears about Wikiliaks revelations as well.
And then, everyday of the week there is a certain amount of stupid in play as well, even on the international scene, where we would hope we are well led by the best of the best. But that’s a lie we have come to understand, so stupid easily carries the day.
Nice catch. Interesting reverberation of the messages.
What I don’t understand about the condom controversy is why, if the whores didn’t want to get fucked in the nude, they didn’t refuse until he put one on. Am I missing something here?
At least he’ll be able to get great Panama hats at a good price.
hi knut — see my #45
You shouldn’t insult workers in the oldest profession who sell their bodies by confusing them with female agents who’ve prostituted their souls to the empire.
I suppose every place has risk, but it sounds like JA will have to be on his toes in Ecuador.
http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travel-and-living-abroad/travel-advice-by-country/south-america/ecuador/
I wouldn’t put it past a US agent to take advantage of that fact.
thank you so much for this.
Well told.
Hurrah for Ecuador! Despicabilities for US, UK and Sweden. I sincerely hope Assange is already in Ecuador and will be kept safe from American special ops.
So we’re there crowds gathered around the embassy for the announcement? There were only about 20 peeps at th embassy this morning at 7 a.m. London time.
From previous thread or twitter, there is also a lawsuit against Assange in Ecuador. I believe I relates to wikileaks docs on police chief.
Precisely, phred.
Actually, I am NOT joking.
What I am suggesting is that the media of the US and the UK will “spin” what is going on, but that more and more human beings fully realize that the behavior of the “governments” of the US and its “friendly allies” is that of tyrants, that premised upon captive domestic societies, that possessed of a “belief” in overwhelming destructive “power” as the means and method of “control”.
Such “control”, despite what some may imagine about trains running “on time”, leads, as you suggest, to a collapse of societal first principles and foundational values, resulting in broad and general failure, catastrophe, and specific calamities … and to the creation of “acceptable” barbarism and a total breakdown of necessary human trust …
There is no reasonable doubt which may be asserted that the US “government”, for chilling and concrete example, has eschewed the Rule of Law and established an entirely illegitimate structure of criminal control with the clear intent of destroying the capacity of the people to protect themselves from predation, of the society to protect itself from being gutted for fun and for “profit”, and the nation of being destroyed completely, in terms of Constitutional legitimacy.
Once upon a time, such actions were properly called treason.
Those who seek to destroy a nation from within are far more dangerous than an enemy from without.
The entire political class of this nation is complicit and deeply involved in this treasonous behavior, including the corporate-owned media, which is, again without any rational question, deliberately hiding truth from the people and ignoring all efforts, worldwide, at popular resistance to military and economic forces intent upon total control of the people.
One thinks of what is now unfolding in the “Horn” of Africa, and the self-immolations occurring in Israel … that is the US militry’s Africa Command’s intent to control that region of the world, to maintain economic control of commerce between China and Europe … and the efforts of the Israeli government to shift attention from ITS economic austerity and the crushing effect which it is having on human beings to its military belligerence toward Iran …
The US media studiously ignores both, as neither would further the “dreams” of domination entertained at the very highest levels of certain “governmental” and corporate “circles”.
Now, more than ever, attention must, by whatever rational means may avail us, be focused upon the “nature” of such “control” as we see being pondered, apparently “seriously” in Great Britain … and one notes that people in the streets fully understand, and abhor, what is likely being planned.
The people know, even if “leaders” do not, that worldwide conflagration needs very little to ignite it … and the elite fool themselves completely if they imagine that they, and they, alone, will emerge from the disaster they flirt with, unharmed and undiminished in power.
DW
Good Morning Kevin and all you shrill motherf*****s….
am late to the party, but read and re read Kevin’s post – did UK serve notice of revocation of status for Edcuadorian Embassy ?? (Brit legals saying it would take 7 days after notice served)
can not tell you how many I wish to unfollow on twitter this morning :~o apparently this Assange creeper dude is going to ruin, simply ruin ! the Back-to-School Dance – sniff !-
fuck me “Ecuadorian”
the Edcuadorian Embassy is next door
cbl @ 74: next door?
was simply making fun of my error – the Colombian Embassy is next door, ocupying same complex as Ecuador
They did a good job of cropping Hillary out of that photo of the British Foreign Secretary, but you can still see the strings.
As of last night, no. That is my understanding. I’d have to dig through the thread to find a link…
Sofia Wilen’s ex-boyfriend Seth Benson now lives in SF. Has any one ever tried to interview him?
Oh, we were just talking about her over at this thread:
http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2012/08/16/ecuador-endorses-fears-of-julian-assange-grants-asylum/#Respond
I’ll try not to take offense at that.
It’s not so bad once you get used to it.
Pretty obvious that the threat from the UK and the 5 police vans surrounding the embassy were a way to try to force Ecuador’s hand. Now they see (and the emergency summits of UNASUR and ALBA should make this clear) that invading Ecuador’s embassy would be a significant diplomatic mistake.
Any retaliations against Ecuador will be illegal under international law per conventions on asylum, and Ecuador will no doubt pursue legal action as necessary.