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.
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
If they'll forcibly ground the Presidential plane from a sizable country, do you really think they wouldn't stoop to trumping up some rape charges and put a little pressure on Sweden too?
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
Morales has already gotten apologies from the countries involved. The new information here is that Assange lied in an effort to precipitate an incident like this.
But you're going to get one anyway.
Sweden have this law that they can extradite people back to their country of origin if they committed an offence in the country, but IF they're wanted by someone else for a crime, they can extradite to that third party country. What Sweden are doing is NOT charging him, since if they did, they'd have to send him to court FIRST, and if they find him guilty, would have to jail him first. But as long as they don't actually charge him, they can just kick him out. HOWEVER, they can't kick him out (to the USA who will then issue a warrant for his arrest to get Assange) unless he's in their country. Therefore the insistence they have to interview him on Swedish soil, not foreign soil.
The UK, meanwhile, have an extradition treaty that requires it to be illegal in the UK, and that there be some proof to make the call. And you can appeal the extradition order - except in some cases, which has actually caused many problems for the Labour government when they handed people over to the USA without any evidence. Therefore politically unsound to just insist that Assange should be given to the USA.
Sweden, as long as there's the accusation of a serious crime against him, can be exported out on the terms of the court or political class and no appeal: he's not allowed to stay in the country. They just move him to the USA who asked to have him.
What is that Assange guy doing?
Masterfully trolling the US government?
I mean, c'mon... Getting us to take down a plane carrying the president of a sovereign nation? Fucking beautiful!.
And can you deny that we deserve it, for listening to intelligence from someone actively resisting extradition not because he fears because he fears a cushy Swedish prison, but because he fears subsequent rendition to the US?
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.