Ecuador Cutting Off WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange's Communications Outside London Embassy (suntimes.com)

The government of Ecuador said on Wednesday it has cut off internet access in its embassy in London to Julian Assange, the founder of the whistleblowing site WikiLeaks, saying that he was putting the country's international relations at risk. In a statement released on Wednesday, Ecuador said that the step had been taken because Assange had failed to abide by an agreement not to interfere in the South American country's relations with other states. From a report: As part of an agreement between Assange and the Ecuadorean government, he is not permitted to send any messages that could interfere with the South American nation's relations with other countries. Assange has been living in Ecuador's embassy for more than five years.

Comments

HAHAHA

[Anonymous Coward]

Nt. Even the people protecting him think he is a **** ****

Wifi

[Anonymous Coward]

Hopefully he can pickup on some outside wifi signals.

Re:Wifi

[jolyonr]

Yes, I'm sure there's a public wifi just in reach called "NotMI5Honest" that he could use.

Perhaps it's time for Ecuador to start charging him rent.

Re:Wifi

[Martin Blank]

Given the amount of Bitcoin in Wikileaks' wallets, this shouldn't be a problem.

Well, for the next week or two, anyway.

Re:Wifi

[Anonymous Coward]

They should. He's just an attention-seeking, man-child mooch and he's not even grateful.

Re:Wifi

[UnknowingFool]

Unlikely. I'm pretty sure that most embassies employ various methods to prevent unauthorized wifi signals from penetrating the embassy.

Re:Wifi

[GameboyRMH]

Sounds like a job for an optical link then!

Re:Wifi

[UnknowingFool]

Sure. He can just contact any ISP he wants to have one installed what is considered sovereign territory of Ecuador. The country won't mind. Also all ISPs would love to get entangled in an international incident.

Re:Wifi

[Anonymous Coward]

wtf is he doing still hanging out there?

Why doesn't he just go out and face the consequences of his actions, fair or unfair, and get on with his fucking life?

"oh poor me, the world wants to be mean to me", well get over it, the world is unfair and mean to most people. Thats what lets us know we are still alive, not trying to hide in somebodies embassy avoiding responsibility for ourselves.

Re:Wifi

[GameboyRMH]

He has groupies, right? They can set up the optical link and the ISP doesn't have to know who it's for.

Maybe just an optical link to a cell data connection on the balcony? It's expensive, so they'd have to sell some buttcoins.

Re: Wifi

[bill_mcgonigle]

Yes, being waterboarded at Gitmo and then executed for "treason" is how people embrace life. Bold words, AC.

Re:Wifi

[Rei]

This is a common myth. An embassy is not treated in law as part of the sending state. Rather, the privileges enjoyed by an embassy and its personnel are only those provided by the receiving state's laws implementing the Vienna Convention; outside of the privileges that the Vienna Convention provides, the receiving state's laws still apply, and the land still remains part of the receiving state's territory.

Re:Wifi

[UnknowingFool]

Maybe just an optical link to a cell data connection on the balcony? It's expensive, so they'd have to sell some buttcoins.

And again, the government of Ecuador won't mind that he's breaching security of their sovereign territory at all? I don't doubt there are technical solutions to this; I seriously do not think Ecuador will allow any of them.

Re:Wifi

[UnknowingFool]

This is a common myth. An embassy is not treated in law as part of the sending state. Rather, the privileges enjoyed by an embassy and its personnel are only those provided by the receiving state's laws implementing the Vienna Convention; outside of the privileges that the Vienna Convention provides, the receiving state's laws still apply, and the land still remains part of the receiving state's territory.

Can Julian Assange install a new internet connection inside the embassy for his use? The answer is not without the permission of Ecuador who does not seem agreeable to it.

Re: Wifi

[mschuyler]

Oh, you mean like "Chelsea" Manning? Hard life, that.

Re: Wifi

[Anonymous Coward]

Bradley manning didn't give the presidency to Donald trump. Assange did. Nasty woman Clinton and her cronies in the deep state will never forgive him.

Re:Wifi

[Obfuscant]

Given the ubiquitous nature of cell phones, it is almost certain that the Embassy does not block cellular signals. They may try to block WiFi and provide their own to employees and staff, but it is unlikely they do the same with cellular services.

Re: Wifi

[lucm]

Yes, being waterboarded at Gitmo and then executed for "treason" is how people embrace life. Bold words, AC.

This is the most retarded comment I've read today, and yet I just spent the last half hour on 4chan.

Re:Wifi

[lucm]

I wonder if they get diplomatic net neutrality

Re: Wifi

[Anonymous Coward]

You really should seek professional mental help. You are suffering from paranoid delusions and are not in touch with reality.

Re: Wifi

[bestweasel]

You think President "I love Wikileaks" Trump will send Julian to Gitmo?

Re: Wifi

[Anonymous Coward]

Unlikely. I'm pretty sure that most embassies employ various methods to prevent unauthorized wifi signals from penetrating the embassy.

You're 'pretty sure'? So you work in signal intelligence, MI5, CIA? This is code for yes but I can't actually tell you?

Or are you full of shit?

Re: Wifi

[Anonymous Coward]

So? The Geneva convention says it follows all of the laws of the sending country.

Trying to act smart but canâ(TM)t even answer your own question. You should be listing what the Geneva convention so people can read for themselves...

Re: Wifi

[UnknowingFool]

So what you're saying is that embassies don't understand what a Faraday cage is. Or that cell jamming technology doesn't exist. I'm not talking about Star Trek level technologies here.

Re: Wifi

[Rei]

So? The Geneva convention says it follows all of the laws of the sending country.

No, it does not. Try reading it some time. This idea that the sending state's law applies on embassy grounds is just a myth. What applies on embassy grounds is limited circumstances in which the receiving state may do various actions.

Note that in no case are the immunities unlimited. For example, specifically in the case of embassies and Ecuador, Italian police once caught them using a diplomatic "pouch" (normally immune to searches) to smuggle cocaine. Once they had found reasonable suspicion that it contained drugs, they searched it. How was this legal? Because the Vienna Conventions only apply to things being used for valid embassy purposes. There's of course sometimes a fine line dividing "valid" and "invalid", but it's mostly a political one, not a legal one; the receiving state will generally shy away from enforcement except in egregious cases (such as drugs or weapons smuggling, or in one case even sending humans!) in order to not cause a political stir.

In the Assange case, it would have been well within the UK's rights (as they pointed out to Ecuador early on) to raid the embassy, as they considered sheltering him to not be a legally valid purpose under the Vienna Conventions. However, this would have almost certainly resulted in significant political consequences - at the very least damaged diplomatic relations, and likely trade relations as well. Over the issue of Assange, Ecuador gambled (correctly) that the UK wasn't willing to accept that.

Re:Wifi

[MichaelSmith]

He should be able to use 4G on a mobile phone. Maybe Ecuador will cut off his power too.

Re: Wifi

[Anonymous Coward]

The same President that backtracks and changes his mind in the same sentence? Why not?

Re:Wifi

[Rei]

Ecuador can put whatever conditions they want on his stay; Assange doesn't own the place. They could demand that if he wants to stay there he has to wear a gorilla costume 24/7 and walk around quacking like a duck; there's nothing in the law that says you have to let any random person stay with you rent-free and can't impose any conditions on their stay. They could literally have security carry him out the door and that'd be fully within their rights, just like it'd be your rights to do so if you let a guest stay in your house and they didn't follow the rules you laid out.

Re: Wifi

[Anonymous Coward]

The president who tweats how much he loves Russia and Putin, but who just threw out 60 Russian âspiesâ(TM)? The man is all contradiction, mixed messages and, frankly, lies.

Re: Wifi

[UnknowingFool]

I believe that inside an embassy is a good use case for cell phone jammers.

Re: Wifi

[Obfuscant]

So what you're saying is that embassies don't understand what a Faraday cage is. Or that cell jamming technology doesn't exist. I'm not talking about Star Trek level technologies here.

I don't know who you are replying to with this, but of course embassies know what Faraday cages and cell phone jammers are.

Both technologies are simple to implement, but have significant downsides. Yes, the embassy could try putting the entire building inside a Faraday cage, but opening a window or standing in an outside courtyard would be trivial ways to bypass that. They can install cell phone jammers, but then nobody's cell phones would work and that would be a significant inconvenience to staff and visitors.

They almost certainly have secured areas that are shielded against RF, but they almost certainly aren't letting Assange into any of them.

Re: Wifi

[MichaelSmith]

Its only a little place. Any jammer which could cut Assange of 100% would affect coverage in the street, and probably be against local laws. People rely on cell phones for safety.

Re: Wifi

[UnknowingFool]

ts only a little place. Any jammer which could cut Assange of 100% would affect coverage in the street, and probably be against local laws.

That relies on the notion that someone setting up a cell phone jammer never assessing the range, effectiveness, or selectivity of jamming or blocking methods.

and probably be against local laws.People rely on cell phones for safety.

And whose laws would be broken? First of all it would be Ecuador's laws that are in play and second, many government buildings around the world block and jam cell phone signals. How do you think they get around these laws unless there are granted clear exceptions. For example, I would guarantee you that you can't get a cell phone signal inside the NSA or FBI or CIA headquarters in the US. I would also guarantee you that can't get a cell phone signal inside the MI6 building in London. I would think various embassies around the world ensure that wifi/cell phone signals are blocked for security reasons.

Now, he is in prison

[Ronin Developer]

If he has no means to communicate with the outside world or to travel freely...that's the definition of incarceration. Finally.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Not really, he could walk out any time. As a matter of fact, I wish he would walk out. Let the Brits deal with him.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

He can walk out the front door anytime he wishes...

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

One day he'll probably sneak out in the laundry or something.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Rei]

Someone like Assange will go stir-crazy without net access. He'll have to resort to having memory cards smuggled in and out. I wonder how they plan to keep him away from cell phones? Confiscation of guest phones and periodic room sweeps?

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Max_W]

If he has no means to communicate with the outside world or to travel freely...that's the definition of incarceration. Finally.

At least if he is incarcerated he will finally have one hour outdoors every day. Every cloud has a silver lining.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[bobbied]

He can walk out the front door anytime he wishes...

(sarc)Trading the Gilded cage in the embassy for a British jail cell? Yea, he's "free" to choose. (/sarc)

Re:Now, he is in prison

[bobbied]

If he does walk out the front door it will be straight into the arms of waiting UK police...

I'm sure the Brits will "deal" with him if he does and I'm guessing that will include an all expense paid trip to the USA and any number of federal prisons for the majority of his remaining life.

So, it's the embassy or a "real" prison. Some choice the guy has left himself. He might have been better served by keeping a low internet profile...

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

I have little sympathy for those who flee from justice and hide out trying to avoid responsibility for their actions.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

You do know that the US currently does not, nor has ever had an extradition order on him, right?

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Computershack]

(sarc)Trading the Gilded cage in the embassy for a British jail cell? Yea, he's "free" to choose. (/sarc)

That is what happens to people who jump bail.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Silver lining from chemtrails

Re:Now, he is in prison

[sosume]

Do you really assume they have been waiting there for the last 6 years, 24/7? He's really not that much a priority, UK police is way too busy censoring social media .

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Surely there's a correlation between your gross mischaracterization of a man's actions and your low level of empathy.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Archtech]

You do know that the US currently does not, nor has ever had an extradition order on him, right?

Nor, AFAIK, on any of the people languishing (if that's the word I'm looking for) in Guantanamo.

So what?

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

We'll see if you feel that way when Turkey tries to extradite you for breaking one of their laws outside their borders.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

He is as free to walk out that door, as you are to not pay your taxes.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

British jail cell? That doesn't sound so bad. But that isn't going to happen.

This guy is going straight to gitmo if he ever gets out. Don't think for a second the Brits wont cough him up for the Americans. Even if they don't have anything they need from him I am sure the CIA will waterboard the shit out of him every day just on principle.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[jellomizer]

He is probably too paranoid for cell phones. He will also need to actually trust people for memory card swap.

He is a prisoner of his own device.

Welcome to the Hotel Ecuador UK

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Joviex]

"gross mischaracterization"

He is literally hiding from the law.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

I was unaware that we were currently involved in armed combat with anyone residing within the UK. If we're involved in active combat currently in the UK, please do provide a link.

Guantanamo is a military prison, so to end up there, you must somehow get detained by our military. This isn't a discussion on if you agree with it or not, simply a statement on how you end up there. Since our military is not currently involved in combat operations within the UK, Assanage would not end up there.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[UnknowingFool]

I would think that in the UK they use surveillance to keep an eye on people. Will he be arrested the minute he leaves? Probably not. But unless he somehow can get to another embassy or country before they pick him up, he's stuck at the embassy.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[edtice1559]

No they gave up. But Scotland Yard spent millions of pounds doing exactly that. Well they say that they gave up at least. Maybe that was a trick to get him to come out and they are still there. But yes, he should assume that they will arrest him the minute he walks out the door. https://www.theguardian.com/me...

Re:Now, he is in prison

[arth1]

At least if he is incarcerated he will finally have one hour outdoors every day.

He has as much outdoor time as he wants right now, as long as it's on the embassy grounds. I.e. the balcony he's used several times, the rooftop and the small trench between the street fence and the building.
And nobody forces him to stay either.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup. You made a good point. Countries enforcing thier laws outside thier borders violates natural law.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[chill]

Wasn't he "dating" Pamela Anderson? I'm sure she can find somewhere to secure a USB stick for transport in and out.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[arth1]

Guantanamo is a military prison, so to end up there, you must somehow get detained by our military. This isn't a discussion on if you agree with it or not, simply a statement on how you end up there. Since our military is not currently involved in combat operations within the UK, Assanage would not end up there.

This would be nice if it were true. However, several of the Guantanamo Bay detainees were arrested in countries where the US didn't have military combat operations, and brought to Afghanistan for bounty. Adel Noori is perhaps the most famous case.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

A prison that just igonres human rights, with people detained by a military acting as an invading force and for no other reason than "you look like a terrorist because I say so".

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Uberbah]

If you're still that ignorant of the situation at this point in time, there's literally no hope for you.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

We'll see if you feel that way when Turkey tries to extradite you for breaking one of their laws outside their borders.

And how is that even slightly relevant.

Sweden tried to extradite him for an alleged crime within their borders.
No one else has an extradition claim outstanding.

The UK want to arrest him for skipping bail, a crime committed within their borders.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[DaveV1.0]

No. He is not incarcerated. He has imposed his conditions on himself. He is free to leave the embassy at any time. He would still be able to access the internet if he could stop being an arrogant asshole for more than five minutes.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[nomadic]

"Someone like Assange will go stir-crazy "

Haha, "will go," right.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Name one other person who the UK government has spent more than 15 million pounds to apprehend for jumping bail based on a warrant for extradition that is no longer valid?

Re:Now, he is in prison

[angel'o'sphere]

That is what happens to people who jump bail.
The "concept" of bail does not exist in Europe.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

He's a close political ally of the President of the United States and the Republican Party. He's more likely to get a Cabinet position than go to Gitmo.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

British jail cell? That doesn't sound so bad. But that isn't going to happen. This guy is going straight to gitmo if he ever gets out. Don't think for a second the Brits wont cough him up for the Americans. Even if they don't have anything they need from him I am sure the CIA will waterboard the shit out of him every day just on principle.

The Americans have not asked for him.

So far there's no real reason to believe that the Americans want him, other than the fact that he says that the Americans want him because hey, he's important, it's all about him, nothing but him.

It's not even clear what they could charge him with if they did arrest him.

I'm guessing that the Americans are laughing their asses off over the fact that, basically, he put himself in prison without any action needed on their part.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Richard_at_work]

British Judges and several Assange supporters would disagree with you, as his bail backers lost their 300,000 GBP bail sureties (in total) when he skipped bail and took up residence in the embassy...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/ne...

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Martin Blank]

Flee from justice after your supporters put up £93,500 for your bail, all of which was forfeit.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Martin Blank]

They'd charge him with bail jumping, for which he now has an outstanding warrant that has been upheld by the courts at least twice. He'd go to jail, serve some portion of the time (maximum of either six months or one year, depending on circumstances), and then get deported to a nation where he holds citizenship, which would be either Australia (where he was born) or Ecuador (which gave him citizenship recently).

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Solandri]

History is full of martyrs who have chosen to die for things they believed in, rather than live without fighting them. We remember them because of their steadfast dedication to their cause despite the horrible choices it left them. Would you know who Nelson Mandela was if he'd simply fled South Africa instead of stayed to fight against apartheid, even though that choice fated him to spend 25 years in prison?

There's actually a tie-in with the immigration debate here. We are so eager to grant amnesty to political refugees fleeing their country because it seems the humane thing to do. But doing so prolongs the very political conditions those people are fleeing, by siphoning off the population willing to fight the oppressive regime, and thus condemning millions more to continue to suffer under that regime. Political change comes about from people willing to stay, fight, and if necessary die for their cause. Not from people who merely try to flee bad conditions. When Castro emptied his prisons and the U.S. willingly took them as refugees, it relieved him of having to pay to house and feed them, and of the political backlash he would have suffered had he merely executed them. He picked a course of action which allowed him to most easily prolong his totalitarian regime at the least cost - allow dissidents to flee the country thus reducing opposition to him within the country, and eliminating the international condemnation against keeping them imprisoned or executing them.

Assange needs to decide if the political weight his name carries helps his cause more by staying in the gilded cage, or by making the harder choice and facing prison in Britain. In that respect he has a real political choice here. Whining that neither choice is a good one from the standpoint of personal comfort won't help his cause.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[PopeRatzo]

If he has no means to communicate with the outside world or to travel freely...that's the definition of incarceration.

Well, the Ecuadorians warned him, if he didn't pick up his room they were going to cut off his internet. I mean, he's been in there for six years now and it must be getting a little ripe.

Assange doesn't strike me as the type that would make personal cleanliness a priority. In fact, I bet there are gym socks on the floor of his room right now.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

(sarc)Trading the Gilded cage in the embassy for a British jail cell? Yea, he's "free" to choose. (/sarc)

That is what happens to people who jump bail.

Umm.. not really.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-36024690

Among the crimes people had been accused or convicted of were murder, sexual assault, rape, grievous bodily harm, drugs offences and child abuse.

Millions of pounds expended to capture a non-British citizen who sought (and was granted) political asylum to thwart a warrant for extradition that is invalid, yet thousands of bail jumpers in Britain wanted for murder, assault, child abuse, rape, theft, etc.. go free because local police depts don't have the resources to track them down.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[GameboyRMH]

Yep, all by design. The US government's entire aim in this ridiculous charade is to keep him locked up, one way or another. They want to show that if you leak their info, you will spend the rest of your life locked in a small room of some sort, and you'll be lucky if it has telecoms.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[lactose99]

This is about the only situation where IP over carrier pigeon might be reasonably successful.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[peragrin]

The Brits are required by their own laws and Wu laws to transfer him to Sweden. There he will be brought before a judge an dprosecution who will state the full case and the fact the the prosecution wishes to drop the case. The judge will grant the motion and he will be on a street with no money, and no friends inside of an hour.

Swedish law doesn't Look one to have charges pressed against you in absentia. They can't drop the inquiry until he shows up.

Then assange alone on a street will get grabbed by someone proabblu Russians but who knows the CIA is cash strapped currently. and held hostage for all his bitcoins.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[GameboyRMH]

That's the best-case scenario that would play out in a perfect world. Less rosy scenarios could involve him being extradited to the US or simply whisked away to a black site prison. Or getting his short prison sentence and then being mysteriously shanked to death in prison by some mysterious person who is totally not a CIA agent.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

She's too loose at this point. Would have to be sewn in. She doesn't want the scar.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

I am a little confused, I thought the arrest warrant or whatever was from sweden for some alleged rapes? So wouldn't that be the first place he would go?

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Tough Love]

(sarc)Trading the Gilded cage in the embassy for a British jail cell? Yea, he's "free" to choose. (/sarc)

That is what happens to people who jump bail.

What confuses me is, the penalty for skipping bail is not particularly extreme. So why not just take his lumps and be done with it?

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Ecuador: Julian, clean your room!
Assange: Your not my mom!
Ecuador: Julian Paul Assange! I'm taking your internet away until you clean up your act.
Assange: I hate you! Why don't you just leave me alone!

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Megol]

Just because it haven't been done before doesn't make it strange.

Because they don't spend the money and effort because Assange is so important or because the crime is so severe.

They do it to signal to the world that while one can abuse the diplomatic rules to avoid punishment for a crime the UK _will_not_be_humiliated_.

Personally I'd think closing down the embassy and ending diplomatic relations with Ecuador would be better. But I'm not that diplomatic.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Megol]

Bullshit. He isn't important, he isn't dangerous and he doesn't know anything.
If he suddenly vanished the US would be blamed and that would be a greater price to pay than the value of having an unimportant egocentric bitch under control.

Did you remember to look up in the sky for black helicopters before posting?

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Megol]

Currently there are no active warrants in that case.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

I think its called "being grounded"

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Go fark your hat.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Nazis will make any kind of excuse to continue being a Nazi, Mr. Nazi. Even now you will respond with "but I'm not technically a Nazi..."

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Archtech]

I was unaware that we were currently involved in armed combat with anyone residing within the UK. If we're involved in active combat currently in the UK, please do provide a link.

Guantanamo is a military prison, so to end up there, you must somehow get detained by our military. This isn't a discussion on if you agree with it or not, simply a statement on how you end up there. Since our military is not currently involved in combat operations within the UK, Assanage would not end up there.

It's really difficult to know where to start rebutting that. More loose ends than the average sheep.

For a start, civilized countries subject to the rule of law do not conduct "armed combat" in other countries unless they are formally at war with them. The US government has not declared war since 1941. Yet it does seem to have had a lot of "armed combat" in a lot of countries.

Incidentally, it is contrary to international law, the Nuremberg Principles, and the UN Charter to invade any country unless that country has declared war on you - or the UN Security Council has mandated the invasion. So every single one of those US "armed combat" operations has been a serious breach of international law. Indeed, they are all what the Nuremberg Court called "the supreme international crime" of unprovoked aggressive war.

Furthermore, what determines whether the US government has "armed combat" in progress in a given nation? Simply whether the President, or the Pentagon, or the State Department, or the CIA, or whoever makes those decisions nowadays, wants to. It can happen in as little as half an hour - as when President Trump decided to launch a couple of volleys of cruise missiles at Syria while he got stuck into his beautiful chocolate cake.

So as far as I am concerned, all countries in the world are potentially sites of US "armed combat" - including the UK. If anyone would like to bet their lives that no team of Americans is going to attack the Ecuadorian Embassy, for instance, to kidnap Julian Assange - as they claim to have kidnapped and murdered Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, without the courtesy of informing that country's government - I certainly wouldn't.

US presidents have taken to ordering people killed anywhere at all in the world, as the mood takes them. And even the president probably has no idea whom the CIA is killing at a given time of the day or night. After all, it's not as if the lives of foreigners mattered.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. Posting anonymously since you got modded down. For the mods who are modding us down: you do not represent slashdot and there are legitimate and rational criticisms of assange's behavior. The extremism of assange apologists will only continue to erode the credibility of your ideology.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[mschuyler]

Oh, you mean the rape thing that he makes a joke about? You know: "I wasn't wearing a condom; I was wearing you!" Ha ha! What a comedian!

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit. He isn't important, he isn't dangerous and he doesn't know anything.
If he suddenly vanished the US would be blamed and that would be a greater price to pay than the value of having an unimportant egocentric bitch under control.

Nonsense. Making an example of those meddling with power is valuable to people in power. Blame is irrelevant. If the US isn't blamed, so what the menace is gone and potential copycats are warned. If the US is blamed, so what the menace is gone and potential copycats are warned.

Learn how politics and statesmanship work. Governments are far above your petty concerns about blame but not above waterboarding a whistle blower every day for years on end until they finally succumb.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[bobbied]

That's an interesting take on this. The US and UK have a pretty strong extradition agreement and if he was just in the UK he'd obviously be pulled to the US. However, the question is in what precedence would the two extradition requests would have. The UK is leaving the EU so there is a time clock on this option, once they are officially out, the USA will get first dibs.

IF Sweden get's him, then extradition to the USA is unlikely. Though there are ways for the USA to snatch him (basically kidnap him while the Swedes look the other way), Extraordinary rendition kind of action. But I doubt the Swedes would knowingly let this happen.

IF the US gets him, he's not going to make it to Sweden...

I'm not a UK lawyer and I don't know any who could confirm or deny what you say. But your take is interesting for as long as the UK remains in the EU.

Either way, it's not a good thing for hm.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, several million pounds to capture a non-violent bail jumping non-citizen who won't spend a day in a British jail (he'd be deported to his home country for essentially a misdemeanor) while tens of thousands of actual British bail jumping criminals including murderers, rapists, child abusers, thieves, etc. go free and continue break the law because the local police departments don't have the resources to track them down. Yeah, that makes sense.

And there is no abuse of "diplomatic rules". Ecuador granted Assange political asylum because it concluded that he was being politically persecuted and that the Swedish and British charges against him was a ruse to extradite him to the US where he would be illegally charged with crimes and would not receive a fair trial. Under international law which has been upheld by a ruling of the UN, Ecuador had every right to do that.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Guantanamo is a military prison, so to end up there, you must somehow get detained by our military. This isn't a discussion on if you agree with it or not, simply a statement on how you end up there. Since our military is not currently involved in combat operations within the UK, Assanage would not end up there.

This would be nice if it were true. However, several of the Guantanamo Bay detainees were arrested in countries where the US didn't have military combat operations, and brought to Afghanistan for bounty. Adel Noori is perhaps the most famous case.

Adel has NOTHING in common with Julian, he was a suspected Al Queda member, and has a complicated history.

d. Detainee acknowledges that if he returns to China he will face execution. He is very fearful that information about him will be passed to the Chinese government. He requests asylum in the United States.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Name one other person who the UK government has spent more than 15 million pounds to apprehend for jumping bail based on a warrant for extradition that is no longer valid?

A strawman, most of the costs spent (no idea if the 15 million is "accurate" or not) has been spent on trying to enforce the European arrest warrant, which they were legally obliged to do. The costs relating to the bail jumping isn't going to be anything like that.

But if you want to follow that sort of logic. Name one other person accused in Sweden of a crime, had a European arrest warrant issued, who then skipped bail (leaving those who put the bail up out of pocket) and then camped out in the Ecuadorian embassy for years. Once you have that other comparable situation, we are closer to being able to compare expenditure.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

So why didn't they snatch him when he was walking the streets of London before he even hid in the embassy?

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

The warrant is no longer valid so what's the point of prosecuting Assange for bail jumping? The UK makes no effort to catch thousands of bail jumpers who are wanted for murder, rape, child abuse, assaults, etc. each year, yet they've spent several million pounds to watch and catch a non-british citizen who is no longer wanted for questioning by the government seeking extradition. In fact, since he is a non-Brit, he would likely be deported rather than incarcerated for essentially a misdemeanor. But of course, everyone who isn't a disingenuous prick knows why the UK is going to such lengths to get Assange and that's because the US has a hardon for him and wants to throw him in jail for a hundred years. Hell, Clinton semi-joked about droning the guy.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Not important. Gosh you wouldn't know that judging from the comments made by people like the US AG or former CIA director now Sec of State plus tons of news stories about him in the press.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[bug1]

You have a very f*cked up understanding of what freedom is.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[squiggleslash]

I'm guessing that will include an all expense paid trip to the USA and any number of federal prisons for the majority of his remaining life

There's not even an extradition warrant for him, why would the UK send him to the US? Why would the US even want him? Yes, he's damaged the US, but he hasn't broken any US laws.

The only outstanding charge against Assange is related to evading arrest over the extradition to Sweden. He wont even be extradited to Sweden, he'll just have to pay a fine. The only "prison time" he'll do will be the few hours between being arrested and being released on bail.

Honestly, at this point his reasons for not leaving the embassy amount to extreme paranoia on his part.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[shentino]

If he causes enough of a headache Ecuador could always just revoke his asylum and shitcan him out the front door.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[GameboyRMH]

Because he was on bail and under house arrest, not "walking the streets."

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Obviously because then he cannot be a self-important martyr.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[MoaDweeb]

This guy is not Mandela, he is just an Aussie rapist.

And probably a cheat, because all Aussies are cheats.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[lucm]

It would require a good antivirus

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

"Nobody's forcing you to stay in prison, it's just that if you cross that line those ten guards over there will all start shooting at you."

Re:Now, he is in prison

[lucm]

Let's see. The situation is that he engaged twice in unprotected sex with girls that were asleep (which is essentially rape), then he ran away when he was accused rather than face these "unfair" accusations, then he hid in the embassy of a publicity-seeking diplomat, and remains there even though the rape charges in Sweden were abandoned because the prosecutor realized he would never appear in court to face the music before going past the statute of limitation.

So at this point the reasons for him to remain "protected" in that embassy are:
1) skipping bail on no longer relevant charges
2) free food and hero status
3) an alleged CIA conspiracy to send him to gitmo (or some other secret prison) because he took part in the leak of confidential documents under the obama administration

You're allowed to cream over that buffoon all you want, but please let's stop pretending that there are "facts" supporting your worshipping.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

"The UK makes no effort to catch thousands of bail jumpers who are wanted for murder, rape, child abuse, assaults, etc. each year"

That's a lie.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

This is central London, not Sacramento.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone like Assange will go stir-crazy without net access. He'll have to resort to having memory cards smuggled in and out. I wonder how they plan to keep him away from cell phones? Confiscation of guest phones and periodic room sweeps?

By now and likely by a long time ago, he knows his service was being used to subvert democracies and just didn't care. He deserves a hell of a lot more than being locked up in an embassy. Personally if he is caught smuggling memory cards and crap I think they should throw his arse out, or better yet do it now.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Julian Assange's lack of cleanliness was reportedly one of the reasons behind Ecuador's recent attempts to extricate him from his five-year standoff in its UK embassy.

A "well-placed" source told The Times that embassy staff have repeatedly complained about Assange's poor hygiene.

Jeremie Zimmermann, a friend and former colleague of Assange, wrote in 2012 that "unless the people around him force him into the shower, he might not change his clothes for days".

One of Assange's closest aides, Daniel Domscheit-Berg noted: "Julian ate everything with his hands and he always wiped his fingers on his pants. I have never seen pants as greasy as his in my whole life."

ibtimes.co.uk

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Nor, AFAIK, on any of the people languishing (if that's the word I'm looking for) in Guantanamo.

Maybe you should do some simple research before making such an ass of yourself?

All the Gitmo detainees are under detaination orders. And do you really think the US military will unlawfully abduct a resident of the UK? That would go down well.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

For a start, civilized countries subject to the rule of law do not conduct "armed combat" in other countries unless they are formally at war with them.

And for a simple end, no civilized country has declared war on another unless the other country has already.

The entire rest of your shit should be flushed down the toilet where it belongs.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Bing Tsher E]

If you look at what the situation in South Africa has deteriorated into recently, not being Mandela doesn't seem like such a bad deal.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[MoaDweeb]

I do not think that comparing Nelson Mandela to the wonderfully corrupt Jacob Zuma/ Gupta fmaily is fair.
No allegations that Mandela took self-agrandisation and benefit of his own self; Willie Mandela is another story.

Assange is Australian and they are have a well-established history of corruption and cheating.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

And I don't think Sweden is even interested in him any more. He could probably walk out right now and only face penalties from the British government for evading arrest, which would most likely be a slap on the wrist and deportation.

His paranoia is making this into a far bigger issue than it would be.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

... except incarceration means being kept in one place. There's at least one door in the embassy. He can use it when he feels like it.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

And do you really think the US military will unlawfully abduct a resident of the UK? That would go down well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://www.telesurtv.net/engl...

Just two quick links on things the CIA has done, and got exposed for... Don't think they would release any info on the more "iffy" things they have done..

Going in for a known, and proven, terrorist may be fine. The problem is where do you draw the line on who to go after without the knowledge or cooperation of the local law-enforcement.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[dunkelfalke]

He has skipped bail once. I doubt he would get another chance at bail ever again.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

On what charges exactly?

Re:Now, he is in prison

[thegarbz]

The "concept" of bail does not exist in Europe.

Ease up, Brexit isn't until 2019.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

The US doesn't have to make a big song or dance over an extradition request. They probably sent it a long time ago. Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, said in 2017 that the arrest of Julian Assange was a priority. Like, we literally know he said this. He isn't keeping it a secret, so don't delude yourself in thinking Assange is engaging in unnecessary paranoia.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[hcs_$reboot]

Doesn't he have data reception from his mobile phone, like us all, mortals?

Re:Now, he is in prison

[angel'o'sphere]

Oh, thank you. I was not aware that UK has a bail system.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[MichaelSmith]

The Birdman of London?

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a bit like being incarcerated by neighbours because I locked myself in their spare room and I won't leave, and they turned off the wifi, and I can't tweet anymore.

A weird definition of incarceration.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[DaveV1.0]

No. He made his choices and is where he is. He can leave that embassy at any time to face the consequences of his actions, I know you and your ilk have a hard time understanding that actions have consequences but they do. Instead, he chooses to stay in that embassy, a prisoner of his own refusal to face the consequences.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would Trump want to harm a Russian troll?

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Agripa]

You do know that the US currently does not, nor has ever had an extradition order on him, right?

An extradition order is irrelevant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re:Now, he is in prison

[strikethree]

Remember this comment for when he leaves the embassy. He will end up in a nasty prison whether or not it is on American soil. I am guessing Egyptian soil or some poor Eastern European country. He will be tortured, possibly to death.

I say all this as a disinterested outside observer. I don't care about him or about why America wants his ass to rot. I would be willing to bet 90% of all future money earned by me that his future is tied with what America wants.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[strikethree]

Because the lumps for skipping bail is not what he fears. He fears American retribution and America WILL extract it from him sooner or later.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[Anonymous Coward]

He shared leaked documents. Secrets that were embarrassing to govt when revealed. Why do govts have embarrassing secrets? That is wrong more than Julian is wrong.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[david_thornley]

Think back to when Assange was relevant. He voluntarily moved to Sweden, and when he was wanted for sex crimes voluntarily went to Britain. This suggests that he felt safe in both countries, even though the UK is known for handing people over to the US.

Then, Sweden sent a valid extradition request to the UK, and Assange started making noises about how he'd be in danger in Sweden because the US would grab him. The British courts examined the case in detail and found there was no reason not to extradite him, so he fled to the Ecuadorian embassy.

I've seen zero evidence that the US actually wants him. There have been government officials who have disliked him, but that's not the same thing.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[david_thornley]

Do you have any support for that belief? I haven't found any. I haven't seen evidence that the US wants him. Particularly now, he's mostly irrelevant and not worth the fuss extraordinary rendition would cause.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[david_thornley]

Assange is alleged to have committed rape in Sweden. (The evidence I've got suggests he actually did rape at least one woman, but that's obviously not definitive.) That's not non-violent. Sweden had to make the case that he was wanted for what would be a serious crime under UK law, or the extradition request would have been invalid. The UK courts considered that carefully, and agreed with Sweden.

Hence, Assange is not a non-violent criminal.

Also, this is an abuse of diplomatic rules. Diplomacy is not intended to shelter fugitives from justice. There is no good evidence that the US even wants Assange, so it comes down to Ecuador making crap up to make it look all legal.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[david_thornley]

I won't say you're making crap up. I will say that Assange is making crap up and you're falling for it. Nobody's supplied any reasonable evidence that the US wants him. If we did, we'd have filed an extradition request with the UK when Assange first arrived there, as the UK is known for handing people over to the US.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[david_thornley]

From what I've gathered, they withdrew the request because Assange wasn't going to be available, and they can reinstate the main charge whenever they like. The statute of limitations has passed on the lesser charges.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[david_thornley]

Wouldn't that make it easier? Alternatively, why didn't the US file an extradition request of their own?

Re: Now, he is in prison

[bobbied]

I think the US does want him at this point. IF for no other reason than to question him about sources under threat of prosecution. Sweden won't extradite him to the USA, but the UK clearly would. The USA wouldn't likely attempt to snatch him out of Sweden as he fears. Sweden wouldn't allow it and the risks to USA operatives would be high with a low reward.

Assange is pretty much a pawn in the grand scheme of things anyway. I doubt the USA would care all that much what happens at this point. I'm guessing they really only care that he's kept offline.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[GameboyRMH]

He was already effectively in custody and on the path to being extradited if such a thing was being planned. The US wasn't expecting him to jump bail and dress up as a woman to sneak into the Ecuadorian embassy.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[bug1]

"facing consequences of his actions" has nothing to do with definition of freedom.

You must have no understanding of the concept of copyleft, and sacrificing some freedom to promote freedom for the system.

From your high account number and generic opinion you may as well be working in a bot farm, or worse your an unpaid propaganda victim.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Megol]

You don't understand that by letting Ecuador get away with their childish game there may be more severe consequences than letting one of your "actual British bail jumpers" (Assange is one too FFS) walk free for a few more days. And it's much easier to keep watch when the location of the wanted person is known. Should they just let it slide by?

And it's absolutely abuse of diplomatic rules.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[houghi]

I remember a time when we called people paranoid if they said that people where listening in on their phone calls and network traffic. Those are the sane people now.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[david_thornley]

He was on the path of being extradited to Sweden. The US never filed an extradition request. The US didn't swoop in and grab him when he was under house arrest, and there was a good chance he was going to Swedish custody, so they wouldn't have another chance that good.

Re: Now, he is in prison

[david_thornley]

And, in that case, his safest move would be to arrange to give himself up to Swedish authorities.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Uberbah]

You're allowed to cream over that buffoon all you want, but please let's stop pretending that there are "facts" supporting your worshipping.

Says the guy tossing the CIA's salad:

1) The women went to authorities not with rape accusations but to ask for an STD test
2) The state investigated the situation and cleared Assange to leave the country
3) Another, politically connected prosecutor steps in and starts throwing around the "R" word
4) Assange agrees to return to Sweden but wants a promise he wont be handed over to the United States, as Sweden has kidnapped people to be tortured by the CIA. Sweden continues to refuse that request to this day.

#4 alone means you and every other Assange hater is engaging in willful dumbfuckery. If this is really about a rape allegation and not a pretext to get Assange in U.S. custody, then let it be about rape allegations, for which Sweden's statute of limitations doesn't run out until 2020. And this was all old news five years ago - but now we can also add:

5) The UK government pressured Sweden to keep up the investigation and continues to spend large amounts of money on a police presence for what is now a bail jumping case
6) The case of Gottfrid Svartholm is the nail in your gaslighting coffin. Sweden goes to great lengths to have a Pirate Bay founder arrested in a non-extradition country on copyright charges. But as soon as he arrives in Sweden he is interrogated for weeks, in solitary confinement, without a lawyer or outside contact for an alleged crime in another country. And later on he is deported to said country where he is imprisoned.

Back to #4. Even if you think Assange is full of shit on returning to Sweden voluntarily if they give him a no-extradition promise, the threat of that possibility is what got Assange asylum from Ecuador. You take that threat off the table, Ecuador no longer has a reason to continue that asylum. Sweden could have taken care of this with the stroke of a pen waaay back in 2011, saving UK police millions of pounds in the process - also old news for anyone who doesn't have a hole in their heads. So are you gonna pull yours out now, or go on buying ranch dressing by the barrel?

Re:Now, he is in prison

[DaveV1.0]

He is free to leave that embassy at any time. All he has to do is face the consequences of his actions. This has nothing to do with "copyleft" and stop being a shithead. It is about that little punk not wanting to wear a condom.

Grow the fuck up, child, and stop being a fucking moron.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[bug1]

There are obvious similarities between the freedom trade-offs in the software world and many other aspects of life. The fact that you aren't willing to let yourself see that, and your lack of emotional control indicates your not capable of seeing the truth.
Have some respect for yourself and stop choosing to be an intellectual and emotional cripple.

Re:Now, he is in prison

[Martin Blank]

The warrant is no longer valid so what's the point of prosecuting Assange for bail jumping?

Because bail jumping is a separate offense. Letting one person skip bail until the prosecution loses interest (or critical witnesses become unreliable or unavailable) makes it far more likely that others will as well.

History repeats itself. Censoring will never work.

[Anonymous Coward]

So he will leak everything on the internet of China? or maybe hack a satellite to massive redpill normies

Not very welcome

[arth1]

The current Ecuadorian government inherited Assange, and it's no secret that they don't agree with his staying at the embassy. It's not the first time they have cut his access, and overall, making it undesirable for him to stay and get him to leave on his own there is likely the overall strategy, avoiding any backlash from actually tossing him out.

Re:Not very welcome

[amiga3D]

He won't quit agitating. He is attacking people using his access and you can't blame Ecuador for getting tired of it.

Re:Not very welcome

[Uberbah]

The problem with this narrative is that Ecuador just granted Assange citizenship. Not the kind of thing you'd do if you're just trying to evict someone.

Re:Not very welcome

[Anonymous Coward]

>making it undesirable for him to stay and get him to leave on his own there is likely the overall strategy,

No, that's not it. As it states in the TFA, Assange apparently violated an agreement with the Ecuadorian government about commenting or criticizing anything they feel is "interfering" with their ability to conduct relations with surrounding countries in South America. A recent twitter comment about Senain, the National Intelligence Secretariat of Ecuador, buying some hacking tools years ago was enough for the embassy to revoke his internet, apparently.

Re:Not very welcome

[nomadic]

I am a citizen of the US. That doesn't mean I can just show up at any random US embassy with my pillow and insist I can sleep there.

Re:Not very welcome

[Uberbah]

Non sequitur. If Ecuador just wanted to show Assange the door, they wouldn't have just granted him citizenship.

Re:Not very welcome

[arth1]

The problem with this narrative is that Ecuador just granted Assange citizenship. Not the kind of thing you'd do if you're just trying to evict someone.

Oh, I don't know about that. It could help getting him out of the embassy, and was followed up with a request to the UK to grant Assange diplomatic status as an Ecuadorian citizen (it was denied).
In short, it looks very much like an intent to get Assange out of the embassy.

Re:Not very welcome

[arth1]

Non sequitur. If Ecuador just wanted to show Assange the door, they wouldn't have just granted him citizenship.

They didn't just do that; they followed it up with a request to the UK to grant their new citizen diplomatic status so he could leave the embassy.
It was denied, but nice try.

Re:Not very welcome

[Anonymous Coward]

>They didn't just do that; they followed it up with a request to the UK to grant their new citizen diplomatic status so he could leave the embassy.
It was denied, but nice try.

you got it backwards, dumbass.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecuador-assange-britain/ecuador-gives-assange-citizenship-seeks-end-to-embassy-stay-idUSKBN1F01RP

QUITO/LONDON (Reuters) - Ecuador has given citizenship to Julian Assange as part of its efforts to allow the WikiLeaks founder to leave the country’s London embassy where he has been holed up for more than five years.

Ecuador made the move hours after the British government refused a request from the South American nation for Assange to be given diplomatic status, which could give him immunity from arrest should he try to leave the embassy.

Re:Not very welcome

[tlhIngan]

Non sequitur. If Ecuador just wanted to show Assange the door, they wouldn't have just granted him citizenship.

They didn't just do that; they followed it up with a request to the UK to grant their new citizen diplomatic status so he could leave the embassy.
It was denied, but nice try.

That was probably the reason they give him citizenship. I guess some government official said "Let's give him citizenship and then ask the UK if they would extend diplomatic status on him" without actually thinking that the UK government would deny the request.

It was worth a shot, I suppose, but now they have a bigger mess on their hands.

Re:Not very welcome

[gravewax]

The citizenship granting was purely part of a plan to get him the fuck out, unfortunately for them it failed. They didn't do it because they actually wanted him

Re:Not very welcome

[amiga3D]

You can say anything you like, except when you're entirely dependent on someone else for all support. They might get tired of you causing them problems and ask you to leave. So yes, it's better for him to STFU. Or he could just leave.

Re:Not very welcome

[Bing Tsher E]

I don't think that I know why they granted him citizenship. But I do know that you don't know either.

Re:Not very welcome

[Uberbah]

Copied from the AC below:

https://www.reuters.com/articl...

QUITO/LONDON (Reuters) - Ecuador has given citizenship to Julian Assange as part of its efforts to allow the WikiLeaks founder to leave the country's London embassy where he has been holed up for more than five years.

Ecuador made the move hours after the British government refused a request from the South American nation for Assange to be given diplomatic status, which could give him immunity from arrest should he try to leave the embassy.

Distributed internet access

[Max_W]

It is a bit disturbing how easy an access to internet can be either stopped or limited. Is not it the time for the New Internet? - https://www.wired.com/2017/06/...

Re: Distributed internet access

[Anonymous Coward]

No.

Re: Distributed internet access

[Anonymous Coward]

The internet exists as part of a larger global society that self-regulates by ostracizing undesirable elements like that contemptible asshole in the Ecuadorian embassy. There's nothing wrong with it.

Re:Distributed internet access

[Anonymous Coward]

By changing the Wi-Fi password? Pulling his cable from the Router?
It is a bit disturbing how easy you are disturbed.

Re: Distributed internet access

[Anonymous Coward]

That is not how the internet works

Re: Distributed internet access

[Archtech]

It's nice to know the US government is getting value for the billions of taxpayers' money it has spent on "correcting perceptions" on the Internet.

"US plans to 'fight the net' revealed"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wor...

Re:Distributed internet access

[UnknowingFool]

No I just think he doesn't understand that house arrest entails a lack of choices. For example I'm sure that Ecuador like all countries make sure that there is wifi security at their embassies. No rogue signals and the official wifi is secured. Also it's not like Assange could order up a different ISP to install something at the embassy.

Re:Distributed internet access

[DaveV1.0]

It is only "disturbingly easy" to cut off his internet because he is being a dick to his hosts.

Kind of like if you went to your friends house and started watching very loud porn on your laptop via his wifi in front of his kids and refusing to stop. If he can't or won't make you leave, he sure as hell can kick you off the wifi to stop you.,

Re: Distributed internet access

[Anonymous Coward]

You use an article for 2006? Are you 12? If this was possible 12 years ago, why didn't Bush/Rumsfeld just do it?

Re: Distributed internet access

[Anonymous Coward]

he can just lookup embassy wifi pwd at wikileaks!

Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[jellomizer]

Assange is a Paranoid kook.
Why would any government try to protect a guy who is against government. It is only matter of time, where he is going to bite you back, because he has no respect for anyone. And will do anything to express his narrative.

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[b0s0z0ku]

For one thing, it's in weak countries' interest to have as much strife as much as possible between superpowers (US, Russia, China) as possible. If the big thugs are arguing amongst each other directly, they're less concerned about proxy wars and imperialism in places like Latin America. Keep 'em occupied and worried.

Plus, it feels good to punch up as the little guy.

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[Registered Coward v2]

For one thing, it's in weak countries' interest to have as much strife as much as possible between superpowers (US, Russia, China) as possible. If the big thugs are arguing amongst each other directly, they're less concerned about proxy wars and imperialism in places like Latin America. Keep 'em occupied and worried.

I tend to disagree. Strife between major powers often results in proxy wars simply because teh big powers have too much to lose so they support other countries and let them fight it out. They like the idea of a little power poking the eye of their enemy, it's less risky then an all out confrontation.

Plus, it feels good to punch up as the little guy.

Until, of course, the big guy punches back.

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[b0s0z0ku]

That's why they went for the eyes (surveillance). If someone gets hit in the eyes, they're less likely to know where to hit back next.

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[Uberbah]

If the big thugs are arguing amongst each other directly, they're less concerned about proxy wars and imperialism in places like Latin America. Keep 'em occupied and worried.

The millions and millions of people who have died in your proxy wars or murdered by CIA death squads during the cold war are fascinated by your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[b0s0z0ku]

Perhaps this is Ecuador's revenge for proxy warmongering by the US and UK.

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[surfcow]

Assange helped elect Trump.
The timing of the leaks makes that clear.

Both are narcissists, and actual megalomaniacs.
Little empathy and poor sexual boundaries.
Egos of mythic proportions.

That's my 2 cents.

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[ArylAkamov]

Paranoid kook? Really?
Well, I guess I'd be pretty paranoid if I had high up officials asking about drone striking me and people trying to arrest/kill me because I exposed their law breaking.
Or are we going to pretend the last decade of leaks didn't happen and that PRISM and the NSA don't exist?

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[Anonymous Coward]

almost a haiku

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[GameboyRMH]

All true, the only difference between the two of them is that Assange has some intellect to fall back on when his ego isn't calling the shots (although that's pretty much all the time. He'd elect Trump to get back at Hillary, which is like getting even with an annoying neighbor by causing a nuclear winter)

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[Anonymous Coward]

So you're implying that Wikileaks wouldn't have released the DNC and Podesta emails unless Trump was running? You're delusional.

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[GameboyRMH]

I'm implying that a rational person might've held those back for a while to avoid putting a dangerous white nationalist moron into the oval office.

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, he really didn't expose them all by himself, did he? Someone else leaked the information and quite a few others helped with publishing it. But that was not enough for Assange, he had to paint himself as the great hero, travel the world and drum up support for the great work he was doing. Still, how come we haven't heard of other people working with Wikileaks getting an extended vacation in Guantanamo Bay? Is Assange the only one that the US government would like to have as a guest? It is not like we have heard of embassies around the world lodging Wikileaks activists, right?

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[MoaDweeb]

As a member of one of these smaller nations the normal practice is when the elephants are on the dance floor the mice better get out of the way.
Aggravating the elephants is a bad idea.

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[another_twilight]

The US presidential election was between Hillary and Trump and you want people to treat that _rationally_?

Those two make our lot look sane.

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[Bing Tsher E]

Assange helped elect Trump.
The timing of the leaks makes that clear.

Assange helped obliterate the Clinton dynasty. I don't have to like him or the other things he has done very much for that to be a big and good thing that he accomplished.

Just like the fact that Trump helped obliterate the Bush dynasty. Again, Trump doesn't need to do that much more to earn my favor.

And I am somebody who voted for Clinton twice and Bush twice. The swamp needs draining.

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[Gavagai80]

Strife between major powers often results in proxy wars simply because teh big powers have too much to lose so they support other countries and let them fight it out.

But it results in proxy wars with each other's allies and spheres of influences, which may still be beneficial to a far away non-aligned country like Ecuador.

Re:Sometimes a paranoid kook is a paranoid kook.

[GameboyRMH]

I grow tired of these false equivalence arguments. Hillary was an all too boring stay-the-course centrist who never expressed interest in mass deportation programs, committing war crimes, religion-based travel bans, initiating trade wars, using nuclear weapons, or building giant uselesss monuments to xenophobia in the middle of the desert.

Grow some balls

[Stan92057]

Time for him to grow some balls and have his day in court. And im sure their are some Ecuadors who are in need of the funds their government is useing to keep him alive...

Re:Grow some balls

[sinij]

Lets assume he is innocent. Do you think there is even a small chance that he won't end up extradited to US and convicted in a closed-door FISA Court hearing?

Re:Grow some balls

[Anonymous Coward]

I think he'd welcome his day in court. What he would most likely get if he stepped outside is collection by UK authorities followed by a swift rendition to America where he would be either (a) held indefinitely without contact with the outside world, (b) run through a secret court with redacted evidence against him and a secret pre-determined ruling, or (c) both. Total ass that he is, he nonetheless deserves the protections of innocent until proven guilty by the court, and not a kangaroo court. If we allow our government (speaking as an American) to trample the rights of those we disagree with, what do we say when it's our turn?

Re:Grow some balls

[UnknowingFool]

Considering that FISA courts do not try people I would say the chance if very good he'll never be convicted in one. FISA courts exist to grant surveillance requests.

Re:Grow some balls

[Anonymous Coward]

There's no need to assume. Sweden agreed to hear him at the Ecuadorian embassy, dropped the charges and now he's only wanted by the brits for jumping bail

Re:Grow some balls

[Uberbah]

Sweden agreed to hear him at the Ecuadorian embassy, dropped the charges and now he's only wanted by the brits for jumping bail

Statute of limitations doesn't run out in Sweden until 2020. Assange steps out of embassy, the UK police would be happy to hand him over to Sweden, where he can be interrogated for weeks without a lawyer for Wikileaks activity, because he hasn't been officially charged in the US (as Assange haters keep reminding everyone). Then deported to said US. They've done it before:

https://www.theguardian.com/co...

Re:Grow some balls

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure the some 13 to 15 million pounds spent by the UK to guard him for the high crime of jumping bail could be better used by the British people as well.

Re:Grow some balls

[Richard_at_work]

No more of a chance than when he *voluntarily* came to the UK to escape investigation elsewhere - he didn't suddenly become "under threat of extradition to the US" oddly enough until he lost all his appeals against extradition in the UK. Its no harder to extradite him to the US from the UK than it is from any other country, and yet he chose to come here voluntarily.

Re:Grow some balls

[Geoffrey.landis]

I think he'd welcome his day in court.

Apparently not. He's done everything possible to avoid it.

Re:Grow some balls

[Martin Blank]

It's far easier to extradite to the US from the UK than just about anywhere else (even factoring in the Lauri Love decision), which made his claims about Sweden really weird.

Re:Grow some balls

[Anonymous Coward]

"Grow some balls". Because women don't go to court.

Re:Grow some balls

[Desler]

The FISA court is not for trials. So, no, there is no chance that he would be tried and convicted by the FISC.

Re:Grow some balls

[thegarbz]

. Do you think there is even a small chance that he won't end up extradited to US

Nope, I assume there's a large chance he won't be extradited. The USA doesn't have an extradition warrant out on him. Sweden no longer has an extradition warrant out on him. The only thing anyone wants him for is skipping bail in the UK, which usually carries a fine of 500% of weekly income. I suspect if he left he would spend a whole day in jail before being fined for his crime and then left to walk.

Re: Grow some balls

[mapkinase]

Assange is more important to the world than the whole Ecuadorian shitcountry

Huh? Public relations is actually important??

[zarmanto]

... he is not permitted to send any messages that could interfere with the South American nation's relations with other countries. ...

Frankly, if this is really what he agreed to upon entry... than it was a surprisingly ignorant stipulation. Anyone who even has a passing familiarity with his work (which could be established with a simple google search and two minutes of research) would readily comprehend that the only way that they could possibly have prevented him from interfering with their relations with other countries would have been to not let him in the front door in the first place. It's as though they had no understanding of what "harboring a fugitive" actually means; you take this action, and the government bodies who want his ass in jail will be upset with you. That's not exactly a hard leap to make.

Re:Huh? Public relations is actually important??

[Anonymous Coward]

... he is not permitted to send any messages that could interfere with the South American nation's relations with other countries. ...

Frankly, if this is really what he agreed to upon entry... than it was a surprisingly ignorant stipulation. Anyone who even has a passing familiarity with his work (which could be established with a simple google search and two minutes of research) would readily comprehend that the only way that they could possibly have prevented him from interfering with their relations with other countries would have been to not let him in the front door in the first place. It's as though they had no understanding of what "harboring a fugitive" actually means; you take this action, and the government bodies who want his ass in jail will be upset with you. That's not exactly a hard leap to make.

The previous left-wing government of Ecuador led by Rafael Correa which had quite a few sympathies with anti-USA sentiment has been replaced by the less radical Lenin Moreno who campained on a la des-correizacion platform (basically to un-correa-fy) the country. Assange's arraignment is apparently on the list (although probably not very high on the list).

Re:Huh? Public relations is actually important??

[Anonymous Coward]

> It's as though they had no understanding of what "harboring a fugitive" actually means;

Neither do you, imbecile. He was granted political asylum which means the government of Ecuador considers the UK's and Sweden's actions to be political persecution and illegal. A stance that is confirmed by the UN.

Re:Huh? Public relations is actually important??

[Anonymous Coward]

> Assange's arraignment is apparently on the list (although probably not very high on the list).

Moreno has been in office since last May. Assange was granted citizenship in January of this year. That would seems to be at odds with any kind of "Assange's arraignment" (what's that mean, anyway?) plan. In fact, because Assange is now a Ecuadorian citizen, I would think it would make it impossible for Ecuador to just hand him over to the Brits given the fact that Ecuador considers the Brits and formerly Sweden's actions and the threat to hand him over to the US to be political persecution. As an Ecuadorian citizen, Assange now has rights under the Ecuadorian legal system which will not extradite him for the same reason they gave him political asylum.

Re:Huh? Public relations is actually important??

[Anonymous Coward]

What 'work'? Picking and choosing leaks?

Trump/Russia

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm very much in support of his goals - of having open channels of communication where leaks against corruption can be exposed.

But he really did break most of his support by going whole-hog embracing Trump and shoveling Russian propaganda to the extent he did.

What happened to him, I wonder - where did he go so insane?

Re:Trump/Russia

[Anonymous Coward]

Killed and replaced or just another wannabe reich member who finally showed his power level.

The greatest crime in America

[Anonymous Coward]

The greatest crime in America is revealing how dirty career politicians are.
How dare he show a very small example of how evil Hillary is.
I guess if someone had proof that Hillary killed even close to half of the 100+ people who dropped dead around that family she would be considered a hero by the left and the whistle blower would be guilty of treason or worse?

Re:The greatest crime in America

[Anonymous Coward]

The greatest crime in America is revealing how dirty career politicians are.
How dare he show a very small example of how evil Hillary is.
I guess if someone had proof that Hillary killed even close to half of the 100+ people who dropped dead around that family she would be considered a hero by the left and the whistle blower would be guilty of treason or worse?

Does trolling like this pay well? I'm looking for a gig and I could do way better at this than you are doing. Of course, I'm a native English speaking American so it would be easier for me to troll than for you.

Re: The greatest crime in America

[Anonymous Coward]

Truthful trolling; but truthful nonetheless!

Assange could easily go free

[SuperKendall]

There's a simple plan where Assange could easily move outside the embassy.

1) Create a fake Twitter account and post a really mean tweet followed by an announcement you'll be holding a parade just outside London - this will draw the entire London police force and most of the military to strike down the tweeter before he can tweet again, enabling Assange to walk out of the embassy unchallenged.

2) Embed himself in management for an under-age rape gang, as they are immune from policing in the UK and presumably he could make a good living there.

Of course, once free if I were him I'd stay away from park benches and BMW's given how much he has entered pretty much every government.

Free speech dies

[micahraleigh]

If you have something to say that makes the deep government or the DNC look bad, watch out !

We can't have people in foreign countries doing exposes.

The world has been inching to global totalitarianism since the 70s. This is just a new milestone.

Re:Free speech dies

[UnknowingFool]

He is a guest in someone else's place. He was told what the rules were for a guest and failed to abide. If you were a guest in my home and I said you couldn't use my wifi to download porn, am I curtailing your free speech? The difference is you can leave as you the local authorities are not waiting for you outside to arrest you.

The article is light on details on the specifics but he was warned previously not to do it and he apparently violated it.

Re:Free speech dies

[FlamingGuts]

That's a human rights violation IMO. You can't just deny someone porn and expect them to lead a healthy life.

Re:Free speech dies

[micahraleigh]

Conceding your trivial point. Ecuador has the right to persona not grata whoever they want.

The scary part is he got his internet cut off because he was divulging the TRUTH

No More Video Games

[Only Time Will Tell]

No more Counterstrike for Julian!

Re:No More Video Games

[Anonymous Coward]

Mr Assange is notoriously opposed to video games. He considers them a waste of time.

(Captcha: GAMING)

But he still has acess to pr0n, right?

[Anonymous Coward]

Porn is a bsic human right and they can NEVER take that away from him. That would be cruel and unjust.

Re:But he still has acess to pr0n, right?

[Bing Tsher E]

Pamela Anderson could probably arrange to smuggle in a Sears Catalog in her purse.

Violation of Assange's human rights

[mi]

The government of Ecuador said on Wednesday it has cut off internet access in its embassy in London to Julian Assange

But, but, Internet access — fast Internet access — is a human right in better countries...

Why has Julian lost his — with nary a protest?

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember that legally he's inside a foreign country's legal system and regulations when inside an embassy. They can almost set any kind of policy they like, and it sounds like he has been stretching policies agreed in the past to beaking point.

Glibly, go figure!

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[UnknowingFool]

Internet access is a human right in someone's private home in that article. It is not a right in a government facility or a private business. In this case there are security concerns of free and open internet inside an embassy.

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[UnknowingFool]

Also he's inside a government facility which might have additional security concerns and regulations.

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[Anonymous Coward]

Why has Julian lost his — with nary a protest?

he hasn't lost anything, just like the rest of us, he can go to the phone store and buy himself a phone if he wants to.

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[mi]

Internet access is a human right in someone's private home in that article.

He's had a private home inside Equador's government facility for years! The distinction you listed is without difference.

If, as Progressive Humanity claims, Internet access is a human right, no one can be deprived of it without due process.

So, why is Mr. Assange losing his — without the said Progressive Humanity protesting?..

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[UnknowingFool]

He's had a private home inside Equador's government facility for years! The distinction you listed is without difference.

I think you are confusing that he's LIVED in a residence inside an Ecuadorian government facility with that he OWNS a private residence inside an Ecuadorian government. Living there means he's a guest. But let's go with your presumption:A citizen of another country can own property inside Ecuador's embassy. That sounds extremely silly to me.

If, as Progressive Humanity claims, Internet access is a human right, no one can be deprived of it without due process.

I forget, is Progressive Humanity in any way associated with the government of Ecuador? No. So your point then is?

So, why is Mr. Assange losing his — without the said Progressive Humanity protesting?..

No Mr. Assange is an asshole who couldn't abide with agreements he made. Remember he made a previous agreement with Ecuador concerning his usage of their Internet. He appears to violate the agreement.

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[mi]

I think you are confusing that he's LIVED in a residence inside an Ecuadorian government facility with that he OWNS a private residence inside an Ecuadorian government.

The distinction you are trying to make is without difference. Unless you are going to claim, that ownership of one's dwelling is required to exercise that right I cited. Be careful with your answer, because such a requirement would disqualify about 30% of Finns, for example.

No Mr. Assange is an asshole

How interesting. Do assholes lose their human rights — without due process? And when did he become an asshole in your opinion? Was it before or after he exposed certain presidential candidate in bad light?

Remember he made a previous agreement with Ecuador concerning his usage of their Internet

No such agreement is even necessary, if Internet access really were a human right. Is it?..

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps you could use a few years in solitary confinement to learn why whatever communication medium of the day is a human right. It might knock a bit of the sarcastic dick out of ya too.

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[Obfuscant]

No such agreement is even necessary, if Internet access really were a human right. Is it?..

Something being an alleged "human right" doesn't mean that the government of Ecuador is required to provide it to you, any more than it means the US government has to provide it to anyone.

Do you believe that the US government is required to provide internet service to everyone in the US?

Of course, the Internet being a human right is not a fact that has been proven.

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[mi]

Do you believe that the US government is required to provide internet service to everyone in the US?

Whatever I believe is not quite relevant. My question is about the Progressive Humanity... They believe (or believed in 2009), Internet access is a Human Right and welcomed Finland's declaration to the effect.

So, now they either have to protest Assange being deprived of this right without due process or admit, that it is not any more of a right, than the ability to buy cheese.

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[jfdavis668]

Send him to Sweden, where they may guarantee that right.

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[Obfuscant]

So, now they either have to protest Assange being deprived of this right without due process or admit, that it is not any more of a right, than the ability to buy cheese.

And I will say this once again: something being an alleged "human right" does not mean that the government of Ecuador must provide it to you. They are quite within their rights to deny anyone access to the internet service they have within their embassy whether you think "internet" is a human right or not. Or whether this "Progressive Humanity" thing thinks it is a human right.

I think there is less question about "food" being a human right, and I've been in a lot of US (and other) government facilities where they were neither required nor expected to provide "food" upon demand.

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[UnknowingFool]

The distinction you are trying to make is without difference. Unless you are going to claim, that ownership of one's dwelling is required to exercise that right I cited. Be careful with your answer, because such a requirement would disqualify about 30% of Finns [tradingeconomics.com], for example.

Again do you understand what the term "guest" is? Because if you don't that means that you can go to someone else's house and start demanding rights? That is utterly ridiculous. Also your link is about Finland. You do know Finland is neither the UK nor Ecuador right? Again you do understand what sovereignty is right?

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[UnknowingFool]

And I will say this once again: something being an alleged "human right" does not mean that the government of Ecuador must provide it to you.

According to you it's a human right. According to you. The UN doesn't recognize it. Ecuador doesn't recognize it. Even for Finland it's a proposal.

They are quite within their rights to deny anyone access to the internet service they have within their embassy whether you think "internet" is a human right or not. Or whether this "Progressive Humanity" thing thinks it is a human right.

By that logic, any coffee shop that doesn't have wifi is violating your human rights. Does that even remotely sound silly to you?

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[dunkelfalke]

Look, this is simply mi. He is a far right lunatic from the ukraine who frequently abuses slashdot as a platform against whatever he considers left wing or russian, whether it makes sense (very seldom) or not (most of the time).
There is no point to use logic when talking to crazy people because whatever they use for their internal logic is highly idiosyncratic and doesn't even have to be consistent.

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, if I were a guest in your house, and you ended up keeping me locked in your basement in retaliation for me livestreaming you beating your children...yeah no I don't think the police would just say I'm a guest, I can't expect human rights inside another person's home.

Re:Violation of Assange's human rights

[david_thornley]

He's been temporarily living in the Ecuadorian embassy for five years. That isn't his home.

The worst in Slashdotters

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems that the Assange topic brings out the really ugly in the Slashdot crowd: petty, bitter, cynical, superficial.

Folks, sometimes you're really disgusting.

Re:The worst in Slashdotters

[Anonymous Coward]

Nothing to do with Assange. The petty, bitter, cynical and superficial comments show up in almost every topic.

Re:The worst in Slashdotters

[Anonymous Coward]

> It seems that the Assange topic brings out the Slashdot crowd: petty, bitter, cynical, superficial.

FTFY.

Re:The worst in Slashdotters

[Anonymous Coward]

It's what happens if people find out that their hero is really a bitch.

Re:The worst in Slashdotters

[eaglesrule]

The first rule for dealing with whistleblowers is to attack the messenger. They are just doing their job.

Re:The worst in Slashdotters

[Anonymous Coward]

And that is why they get called Deplorables. Maybe if they don't like that, they should quit doing and saying deplorable shit.

Re:The worst in Slashdotters

[Bing Tsher E]

Maybe if they don't like that, they should quit doing and saying deplorable shit.

Too late for that. The DNC emails were leaked, word is out.

Re:The worst in Slashdotters

[thegarbz]

Bahahahahah You clearly haven't seen people talk about systemd

Re:The worst in Slashdotters

[tinkerton]

The /. crowd does appear to have regressed politically but it never amounted to much. It's a tech site.
The main point is that Operation Character Assassination was successful.
Assange has contributed a lot to government transparency but it's very hard to fight the PR. The trick is to divert attention to the flaws someone has and make that the whole issue. That has succeeded entirely. I'm not interested in his flaws. He's been very reliable in his job and you can't say that of many. And he's fucking on our side!
The other side are a whole bunch of warmongers who are falling over each other to be more extreme. One would at least want to know what they're doing. But no, Assange's personal life, that's the real issue.

Re:The worst in Slashdotters

[Anonymous Coward]

Assange is not a whistleblower. He's an attention seeking idiot who is associated with a website that used to be a valuable and necessary tool for allowing whistleblowers to...blow their whistle. At one time he was worth listening to. That time has not been for almost 7 years now.

There are many websites like wikileaks now. With more neutral history than Wikileaks. Without a 'leader' who is hiding from rape charges. Hell just send your documents to the NYT or Guardian and you're good, with probably more anonymous protection than wikileaks can provide, since i'm sure every major government in the world is tracking them now, and has been for 10 years.

Re:The worst in Slashdotters

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm surprised no one seems to remember the relatively recent story of people trying to frame Assange for another sex-based crime. Of course that fizzled out and was exposed almost immediately, didn't even last long enough to make a slashdot story IIRC.
I think the guy's an asshole; I think most governments involved are far worse, and people here being good bootlickers are just disgusting.

Bail [Re:Now, he is in prison]

[Geoffrey.landis]

That is what happens to people who jump bail.

The "concept" of bail does not exist in Europe.

It does exist in Britain, which is all that's relevant here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bail#History

Extradite [Re:Grow some balls]

[Anonymous Coward]

Sweden agreed to hear him at the Ecuadorian embassy, dropped the charges and now he's only wanted by the brits for jumping bail

Statute of limitations doesn't run out in Sweden until 2020. Assange steps out of embassy, the UK police would be happy to hand him over to Sweden, where he can be interrogated for weeks without a lawyer for Wikileaks activity,

He's not wanted in Sweden for Wikileaks activity, or anything to do with Wikileaks. It's doubtful that Sweden cares about Wikileaks one way or the other.

He's wanted to answer questions about a rape investigation. That investigation has been dropped, though, so he's not actually wanted in Sweden at all. (Although they could resume the investigation later, if they chose to, on one of the two rape charges (the other one is past the statute of limitations).)

because he hasn't been officially charged in the US (as Assange haters keep reminding everyone). Then deported to said US.

He can't be deported to the US, since he's not from there in the first place. I think you mean "extradited." But even there, there hasn't (so far) been any charges, much less an extradition request.

They've done it before: https://www.theguardian.com/co...

that's the exact opposite-- a person extradited to Sweden.

Re:Assange is going to PRISON

[Anonymous Coward]

Weak. Troll better slugger.

Just saw "The 5th Estate" & must comment

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: I lost a LOT of respect I had for him previously (assuming what I saw WAS truth that is). He made, imo + life outlook & morals, HUGE mistakes. Ones that only LOWLIFES make.

What kind? Ok:

Using FAKENAMES online (to create a "mass marketing psych mind job" effect (one I see used here on /. along w/ UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous weasel work too) of "jump on the bandwagon" another group of scum use for "all the 'cool kids' (not) are doing it" FUCK THAT!

Who else does? Advertisers - real Saul "the satanist" Alinsky tactics (pure deceit & illusion lies from the KING of lies, the devil, to f you over - nothing more).

Another was his tossing operatives names out there "pell mell/enmasse" NOT thinking it might get them wasted!

(Assuming what THEY were up to was not "no good" (this is the question, right? ALWAYS is w/ "the powers that be" that have lost ALL parameters of boundaries/rules in conduct - you do that? The ENTIRE BARREL ROTS & all it takes is 1 bad apple)).

When a society resorts to losing "codes"/honor or rather chivalry? It destroys itself. Period.

Even (of all people) John Gotti knew & said it "one day, you're gonna miss John Gotti" as his kind, 'evil' as they could be (depends on perspective though - they DID back the working man, via the ONLY THING the corporations fear - hitmen that HAVE to execute contract, no paying them out of it)). There ARE reasons for "tamany hall districts" you know (men will ALWAYS have vice, no stopping it - but you CAN contain it/restrain it @ least).

* Seems even Assange lost sight of that (IF he ever had it - others here said he has NO RESPECT FOR OTHERS, only "his ideas matter"... bullshit!).

APK

P.S.=> Again, assuming the truth of what I saw (especially Assange SHITTING on the guy helping him from the press & the spies I noted above also) is FACT/TRUTH? He's no saint & not even TRYING to be... apk

OFFLINE FOR A REASON

[sexconker]

Q told us this last night.

"OFFLINE FOR A REASON"

Re:OFFLINE FOR A REASON

[Anonymous Coward]

Q told us this last night.

"OFFLINE FOR A REASON"

TIME CUBE! Or should I say Qube... just you wait...

Or is it

[SuperKendall]

It is a bit disturbing how easy an access to internet can be either stopped or limited

Ecuador SAYS it blocked his internet access. When in reality he's probably hacked the whole inner network connected everywhere...

Re:Or is it

[MichaelSmith]

Yeah Assange is an acquaintance of a friend of mine and he does seem to be the sort of person who will use an exploit to access something when asking politely would have achieved the same outcome.

4g Wifi Hotspot

[nucleartool]

Someone get down there and leave a wifi hotspot. As much as Assange is a polarising figure I can't help but think the world is better with him. A little chaos keeps everyone honest. There is a reason authorities hate him so much, some down to him obviously, but really, I see it more of a silencing effort. More whistleblowing is good, Wikileaks does good. Look at facebook right now. The Facebook/Googles/Governments of the world need to be continually checked on what they are doing, else they will keep reaching deeper until stopped.

Your inference does not follow

[Anonymous Coward]

They didn't just do that; they followed it up with a request to the UK to grant their new citizen diplomatic status so he could leave the embassy.
It was denied, but nice try.

In other words, they were trying to get rid of him (dump him into the wider countryside of Equador or whatever, but get him out of the embassy) without violating his status a former government granted him as an asylum seeker. The gambit failed, but it's pretty clear it was done to try and make a problem (Julian Assange) go away without undermining the authenticity of the asylum they grant (even though the current government would rather it hadn't been granted to him). It was a nice try, and does not imply in any way that Equador still "wants" him, or even likes him.

well why not..

[Anonymous Coward]

qy dont he just go to mc donalds and see what happends?im pretty sure he has so many eyes on him that he wont just disaphere.
sweden cant extrodite anyone that did not commit murder

Re:well why not..

[hyades1]

It's not Sweden that really wants him. It's the US. And the British Tories can't afford to really piss Trump off right now. So if Assange leaves the Ecuadorian embassy, it won't be Sweden that tells the Brits to hand him over. It will be the US. And they'll get him, too.

Re:well why not..

[nucleartool]

Why should they get him? Its a charge for a crime in Sweden. For an Australian. In Ecuador (kinda). Bordering Britain. Yet we all know they will piggy back a million other charges under it because it happens to be convenient. The whole thing is purely political. There are worse criminals wandering the streets but its a charge and they will enforce it because he is a VIP criminal. No-one see Assange as a public threat under the current charge. But by-God will they nail him on everything else.

Re:well why not..

[hyades1]

You got it. As for why they should get him, the answer's in your comment. They want him, and that's enough. "Excuse me, sir, but it appears you have been walking openly on the street after having been a jerk for five years. That is an extraditable offense. Please come with us."

"An extraditable offense? Since when!"

"Since yesterday, sir, when our eavesdropping equipment let us know you were planning to leave."

Forest from the trees [Re:Grow some balls]

[Uberbah]

It was all in the link provided.

1) Sweden goes to great trouble to get Pirate Bay founder in custody from Cambodia

2) As soon as he arrives in Sweden, Svartholm is held in effective solitary confinement and interrogated for weeks without a lawyer on completely separate charges for Denmark. People have falsely confessed to murders they didn't commit in far less time.

3) As soon as Svartholm's sentence in Sweden is finished, he was handed over to Danish authorities to be tried in that country for the aforementioned separate charges.

So Assange haters should feel free to stop gaslighting people at any time. The man has perfectly valid fears about the Swedish farce being a pretext to hand him over to the United States.

Re:Forest from the trees [Re:Grow some balls]

[david_thornley]

Then why did Assange go to Sweden in the first place?

Re:Forest from the trees [Re:Grow some balls]

[Uberbah]

Maybe he didn't know at the time of Sweden's penchant for kidnapping people for the CIA's benefit. Or that while Sweden has a reputation for being all socialisticy on their health care and education systems, their criminal justice system is positively medieval in how suspects can be held in solitary confinement for questioning, with no outside contact.

Overstayed His Welcome

[Anonymous Coward]

He's the guest who won't leave. Ever have someone over to your place and they stay too long, and they wind up irritating you?

That's Assange now. Even if you like the guy, and generally agree with his worldview, and want to support him... it's been 5 years. This situation needs some resolution, or at least a better compromise that what exists now. Embassy facilities are for Embassy staff and Embassy business. Assange's case doesn't actually fall into any of that.

For instance, and this is just off the top of my head. Ecuador might be willing to host and shelter him on Ecuadorian soil. It would be less expensive and less disruptive to their London Embassy operations. Yes, there is a delicate matter of the Brits trying to arrest him as he leaves. However this is an Embassy, they negotiate stuff all the time. Arrangements are made, face is saved, international relations are (usually) preserved.

Honestly, having him in the Embassy is just embarrassing and underscores the impermanent nature of his plight.

Re:Overstayed His Welcome

[Anonymous Coward]

>For instance, and this is just off the top of my head. Ecuador might be willing to host and shelter him on Ecuadorian soil. It would be less expensive and less disruptive to their London Embassy operations. Yes, there is a delicate matter of the Brits trying to arrest him as he leaves.

That's the whole point of making Assange an Ecuadorian citizen. His home country, Australia, has cowardly turned their back on him so his only hope of emigrating to a country that won't expedite him to the US is Ecuador.

But the US wants Assange badly, so they're willing to subsidize the Brits several million pounds to capture and extradite him.

Re:Overstayed His Welcome

[another_twilight]

His home country, Australia, has cowardly turned their back on him

No. He was told that this was a criminal matter in Sweden, and then the UK. That if, at some point in the future he is charged by the US, that he can apply for a prisoner transfer to Australia.

His narcissistic fantasies aside, he was wanted in relation to a criminal investigation, refused to return to Sweden, tried numerous avenues to avoid having to face the investigation and every court and legal opinion that he has asked to review the situation has responded in the same way.

People facing criminal investigations do not get to set the terms of the investigation in any country I know of. Maybe the charges were politically motivated, maybe not. We'll never know. He's run away, left supporters liable for hundreds of thousands of pounds of bail and taken advantage of the hospitality of the Ecuadorean embassy. He's claimed persecution and asked for political asylum, but there's absolutely no evidence of any persecution.

But the US wants Assange badly

So Assange claims, and certainly several US figures have spoken out against him, but there's no warrant and no attempt to extradite him. So far all I've seen is a lot of rhetoric from someone whose other behaviour makes me question how much is real and how much is fantasies of self-importance.

Re:Overstayed His Welcome

[Anonymous Coward]

A few things you got wrong..

His narcissistic fantasies aside, he was wanted in relation to a criminal investigation, refused to return to Sweden, tried numerous avenues to avoid having to face the investigation and every court and legal opinion that he has asked to review the situation has responded in the same way.

The charge was brought up but two females that wanted to have him tested for STD's since they both had unprotected sex with him. When the police said that it was not possible to force someone to do that it was handed over to a prosecutor since sex-related crimes are up to the state and the victim cannot choose to drop the charge. The prosecutor later dropped the case and Assange left Sweden. Later a different prosecutor then wanted to reopen the case and then called for him to come back to Sweden to be questioned and he offered them to question him over the phone instead.
This is quite common to do, but the prosecutor refused to have a remote interview, several times.

This is how it all started.. And yes, it all sounds really strange, and was the cause for all sorts of conspiracy theories, like the one where the females where suspected to be, or paid off by, CIA agents.. There was so many theories around this i have a hard time to keep track.
The big difference this is that Sweden do have a track-record of allowing the US to capture people, or even handing them over, to the CIA and i can believe Assange got scared.. Also remember that there was some issue for the UK to hand him over to the US while there was an active extradition-request from Sweden, or something like that..

I can understand that Assange is scared, and how would you behave if you thought it was a quite high risk of being handed over to the US where you have politicians that have called for your execution/life in prison etc.

But i do think this whole thing has gone bat-shit crazy.. UK spending millions of pounds to keep him guarded for a bail-jumping charge where the original charge has been dropped. Conspiracy theories left and right...

But when things like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
happens things usually go bat-shit crazy and people become paranoid. (with or without reason)

Prison

[MBGMorden]

I honest wonder if it wouldn't be better for him to just go serve his time and get it over with. At this point he's basically living in a prison anyways.

Re:Prison

[Anonymous Coward]

Serve time? He did nothing wrong.

Re:Prison

[hcs_$reboot]

https://www.reuters.com/articl...

Re:Prison

[thegarbz]

Serve what time? Breaching bail without indictment is normally nothing other than a fine.

Re:Prison

[david_thornley]

Time spent in the embassy does not count as time served in prison, so at this point he may just as well wait until the statute of limitations on his rape accusation expires in a couple of years.

Re:Wifi, no need

[youngone]

I've been talking to the Ecuadorian tech guys and they have just changed the wifi SSID to GoHomeNowJulian and the password is Solo ve a casa, podrías.
I don't think he's getting the hint.

Give us your gear or GTFO

[Anonymous Coward]

Wireless gear can't save him. The Ecuadorians can say give us your gear or GTFO if they want to play hardball on this.

Re:Wifi - Q

[Anonymous Coward]

Mar 28 2018 00:06:34
Q !xowAT4Z3VQ
463
stay strong!
Stay together!
WE STAND WITH YOU!
**OFFLINE FOR A REASON.**
ENJOY THE SHOW.
Q

Edited because /. sucks cock.

He should be free by now.

[Kludge]

For all the time he has spent there, he could have tunneled out of the embassy with a spoon by now.

Re:He should be free by now.

[Bing Tsher E]

Out to where? The border of Ecuador is quite a ways off.

UK is not BEING humiliated?

[thesupraman]

Really?

Because from where I am standing, the whole process has been pretty damn humiliating for the UK from the very start.

Re:UK is not BEING humiliated?

[Anonymous Coward]

And it would be even more humiliating if he got away when the whole world knew where he was hiding. Or do you think otherwise?

Re: UK is not BEING humiliated?

[Anonymous Coward]

What grounds for percecution in UK?

incarcerated either way

[Anonymous Coward]

He could have manned up and faced his sentence (legit or not) in a comfy jail, and be done with it by now.. instead he's doing more or less the same thing without the counter ticking...

He must be fat by now

[gatkinso]

I mean, seriously.

Amusing typo

[SuperKendall]

given how much he has entered pretty much every government.

Here I meant to say "how much he has *angered* pretty much every government", but "entered" is amusingly more accurate (and pornographic).

Re:Now cut off Julian Assange's Twitter account

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump won, get over it.

Re:Assange is going to PRISON

[Anonymous Coward]

Awww, poor Trumptard is all triggered by Hillary still. Sad.

Wow

[barcarolle]

Wow, the NATO trolls are really out in force commenting on this story.

Re:Wow

[david_thornley]

And the Assange fanbois are continuing with the unfounded FUD. I'm going with the evidence I've been able to find, and my deductions from that. In my opinion, Assange raped one or two women in Sweden, fled the accusation, fought extradition in the UK (which is reasonable), and when he lost fled to the Ecuadorian embassy to avoid facing justice in Sweden. Somewhere along the line he started making crap up about being afraid to come out, lest he be sent to the US. I haven't seen good evidence that the US wanted him back then, let alone now.

Re: Now cut off Julian Assange's Twitter account

[cmholm]

Obama won, twice. Get over it.

I still have no idea where he gets the basics of l

[Anonymous Coward]

Where do his clothes come from?

Does he wake up and walk down to an embassy dining hall for food?

Do they have maid service changing the sheets? Bringing him towels and soap?

Do they have a small shop with razors, toothbrush, toothpaste, etc? ...and he seems to have a computer, maybe they have an embassy business center like th embassy suites hotel chain?

Five years is a long time!

Relentlessness

[hcs_$reboot]

a request to the UK to grant their new citizen diplomatic status ... It was denied

Looks quite like during the 1980's, due to Thatcher's relentlessness 10 Irish prisoners die as a result of a hunger strike.

Retard APK is back

[Anonymous Coward]

Welcome back retard Alexander Peter Kowalski.

I see your inability to form a cogent thought remains.

Unidentifiable anonymous projecting again!

[Anonymous Coward]

Unidentifiable anonymous weasel you're projecting your own issues onto me again!

APK

P.S.=> Grow up weasel... apk

Now's his best shot

[Anonymous Coward]

The biggest threat to Assange is the U.S. and I can't imagine any administration would be more amenable to reaching an amnesty than the Trumps.

Unless you really want to live the rest of your life in an Embassy, now's your chance to get your best deal.

Wearing out his welcome

[ebvwfbw]

I think maybe they're getting tired of him. Guy has been freeloading off of them for 5 years. I think it's just a matter of time before he ventures out and is arrested.

Re: Important discussion topic

[ArmoredDragon]

Pork rinds aren't actually bad. They got a bad name because of the fat free fad of the 80s, along with the lard that is often used to cook them, which itself also has an undeserved bad name. The fat free fad has pretty much been debunked at this point (and suprise, saturated fats and cholesterol aren't either; incidents of heart disease increased exponentially the moment we started avoiding these.) If you already have any kind of heart disease, congestive lung failure, or kidney disease, you might want to avoid the salted rinds, but if you don't have any of those problems, then salt won't ever bother you.