Slashdot Mirror
Bolivia Demands Assange Apologize For Deliberately False Leaks To the US
Rei writes In 2013, during Edward Snowden's brief and chaotic search for asylum that ultimately landed him in Russia, the US faced criticism for handing information to various European nations that Bolivian president Evo Morales was smuggling him out of Russia, leading to the grounding of his flight. In a new twist, in the documentary Terminal F about this time period, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange admitted that he was the one who deliberately leaked the fake information to the US government. Bolivia has been none too pleased with this news and is now demanding that Assange apologize for putting their president's life at risk.
I wouldn't say that.
There's bogus info being spread all the time; a lot of it by political operatives. The next couple of years promises neck-deep bullshit on an industrial scale.
Sometimes, I would love to see folks go to jail for that, but really, the fault lies in the idiots that brought the story.
He's been asked by the Bolivian ambassador to call their president to apologize. This is certainly not a bad thing, and certainly not uncalled for.
It could be a good opportunity to repair relations with an ally.
Blame Austria for their baseless breech of the immunity and inviolability of a president and their aircraft. Diplomatic protocol is widely known and respected across Europe.
Blame Spain, Portugal, and France for falling lock-step in line with Washingtons witch hunt, instead of championing their own sovreignity and autonomy.
Blame the United States for violating diplomatic protocol, strong-arming foreign nations, and once again doing it all without so much as a shred of concrete evidence.
but dont blame Snowden. If anything he simply exposed the cowardice of European member states and the desparate measures to which a broken superpower would go to readily secure their latest antihero in preparation for kangaroo court.
If we were to analyze the situation another way, Imagine Bolivia were so desperate to bring George Bush to trial for Iraqi warcrimes that it forced the presidents jet to land in Lithuania and be forcibly searched for 9/11 documents.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Now let's be happy and rejoice that you aren't the president of anything. Just a Slashdot hot-air.
I think Assange SHOULD apologise. After all, he was risking the life of a head of state (admittedly, the risk was probably fairly minimal). That said, it seems like Morales deserves an apology from a lot of countries, including the U.S. Right or wrong, it would be the diplomatic thing to do. Not apologizing just reinforces the perception of the U.S. as imperialist/bullying. It seems like France is the only one to have issued an apology so far...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...
Something of a dick move. But it highlighted the kinds of crap USA can pull with virtual impunity.
comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
In his eyes he can do no wrong so what does he have to apologise for? If the president had died, well, just collateral damage for the greater good, right?
Why would they bother? Sweden is less likely to cooperate with the US government than the UK is. If they really wanted him, they'd have just gotten the UK to extradite him, instead of fiddling around with getting Sweden to extradite him from the UK, then extraditing him from Sweden....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
You would think so. But apparently Assange enjoys broad public support in the UK, putting the government in a bit of a tough spot. As bad as they want to suck Obama cock, they're already under mounting public criticism just for spending so much to guard the Ecuadorian Embassy. If they openly extradited him the U.S., they would likely face riots in the streets.
Even extraditing him to Sweden had most UK politicians all but pissing in their trousers in cowardly fear. If they weren't such pathetic U.S. lapdogs, they would likely just let him go to Ecuador and be done with the whole mess.
To be more specific, from the EAW:
This is what has been repeatedly upheld in court, with findings of probable cause. Now, you may think the courts are wrong and want to be judge and jury based on whatever tripe you heard through the grapevine about the case. Fine, I get that. But the fact of the matter is, you are not a court of law, and that is where criminal matters belong. Not public lynch squads (note: this applies the same in the opposite direction, such as the people calling for assassinations of those they consider traitors).
*Kid Rock runs for Senate* Democrats: We must run Kid Scissors.
Something of a dick move. But it highlighted the kinds of crap USA can pull with virtual impunity.
Got any of that anger available for Russia and China, who both also consistently do all kinds of nasty things "with virtual impunity"?
It becomes very interesting however, when the injured party is no longer a party. Didn't the woman say she wanted nothing to do with the prosecution here and they are continuing on without her?
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Not just a stunt: It also let him find out how much the US wanted him by testing their willingness to take extreme action. If they are going to risk a major diplomatic incident, then it means he has very good reason to be paranoid and should start assuming every stranger he sees is potentially a CIA deniable assassin.