BBC News is reporting that Assange plans to leave the Ecuador embassy "soon", after remaining inside for two years:
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange says he will leave London's Ecuadorean embassy "soon" after two years. He did not clarify when he would depart but said it was "probably not" for the reasons reported by the UK press. Stories had suggested he was suffering ill-health and required treatment.
Ecuador's foreign minister Ricardo Patino said Mr Assange, who is wanted for questioning over alleged sexual assault offences in Sweden, would continue to be offered "protection".
Mr Assange, 43, who faces questioning by prosecutors in Sweden, denies the allegations and sought refuge in the Ecuadorean embassy in June 2012 shortly after a court ordered his extradition. He says he fears he could eventually be handed over to the US because Wikileaks published classified US military documents on the Afghan and Iraq wars.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18 2014, @04:13PM
Source: http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2014/08/18/julian_assange_says_hes_leaving_ecuadorian_embassy_but_fails_to_offer_explanation.html [thestar.com]
(Score: 1) by Adamsjas on Monday August 18 2014, @04:30PM
He's had time to study for citizenship.
(Score: 3, Informative) by MrGuy on Monday August 18 2014, @04:54PM
Which would matter, except it wouldn't.
Being an Ecuadoran citizen (or, for that matter, ANY country's citizen) wouldn't be defense against a.) getting arrested by the UK police on an outstanding Sweedish warrant, b.) being extradited from the UK to Sweeden, c.) the US filing an indictment and arrest warrant against him after he's in Sweeden, or d.) being extradited to the US to face death penalty charges.
Citizenship is not diplomatic immunity (and even diplomatic immunity is a questionable shield against criminal actions).
The thing keeping him safe RIGHT NOW is that he's in the embassy, which is considered Ecuadoran territory in which the UK has no jurisdiction. Everyone outside the embassy, the UK police can (and assuredly will) arrest him, regardless of what citizenship he claims.
(Score: 1) by looorg on Monday August 18 2014, @05:28PM
d) the uk police will arrest him for skipping bail, a crime in and again the uk.
I'm not even sure if (a) or (d) will come first.
Either or really. I doubt he is going to come to his senses and give up now. Unless the matter at hand is that his Ecuadorian hosts are getting tired of him mooching on their couch for two years and are tossing him out. I wonder why that hasn't happened yet.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Dunbal on Monday August 18 2014, @05:42PM
"Citizenship is not diplomatic immunity (and even diplomatic immunity is a questionable shield against criminal actions)."
No, but a citizen of Ecuador can be made embassy staff and he could be given the diplomatic bag to carry to Ecuador. The person accompanying the diplomatic bag is immune from any prosecution. Of course USA/EU have long ago stopped playing by the rules, ask Evo Morales...
(Score: 5, Informative) by Thexalon on Monday August 18 2014, @06:17PM
For those not familiar with the reference here, Evo Morales is the President of Bolivia, and had his plane grounded and searched in Austria, because the US thought Edward Snowden was on board.
This is about as serious a violation of the rules of diplomacy as you can get without actually starting a war: If you're American, think about how you'd react if, say, China, forced Air Force One to land somewhere and then sent guys with guns on board.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Freeman on Tuesday August 19 2014, @09:27PM
That depends, were they looking for Julian Assange?
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by evilviper on Tuesday August 19 2014, @12:41AM
No, it doesn't work that way. Diplomats must be approved by the host nation (the UK) before-hand.
Hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18 2014, @10:23PM
He probably raped one of the cleaning staff, so it is time to go before Ecuador goes after him too.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Horse With Stripes on Monday August 18 2014, @04:42PM
While I support the efforts of, and need for, WikiLeaks and organizations like it, I have rather mixed feelings about Assange. He has tried to make almost everything about him rather than about WikiLeaks and the necessary work that they do.
No one really knows what happened with the two women who have charged him with sexual assault. The women, as well as Assange, have practiced and crafted their stories to the point that they no longer accurately reflect the events that actually occurred. I recognize that Assange cannot get a fair trial based on the allegations being promoted by governments, his flight from the original allegations, the type of work WikiLeaks does and the behind the scenes deals made by various governments. But throughout all of it he has made the story about himself rather than the WikiLeaks foundation.
The fact that we hear more about Assange than about WikiLeaks pretty much sums things up.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18 2014, @04:48PM
It doesn't help his case when he passes time in the embassy by singing "Grapes grapes grapes, I love grapes, I love grapes" to the tune of the Imperial March. It sounds a bit different when muffled by the glass in the windows.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by frojack on Monday August 18 2014, @04:54PM
What an odd couple of statements to put back to back!
Seems nobody knows, but you?
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1) by Horse With Stripes on Monday August 18 2014, @05:13PM
The stories from all involved have changed multiple times from their original statements. All I know is that they all seem to subscribe to George Costanza [youtube.com].
(Score: 2, Informative) by basicbasicbasic on Monday August 18 2014, @05:06PM
The story here IS Assange - it makes no sense to complain that the reporting of a story about Julian Assange mentions Julian Assange, or that Assange would mention himself when talking about the situation he is in. If your issue is that you hear more about Assange than about Wikileaks reports then your problem is with the press, not Assange.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by keplr on Monday August 18 2014, @05:06PM
I get the complete opposite impression. The press loves a good personality to pin a story on, you see the same thing with Snowden. Although he's done a good job being boring and just laying low in Russia, so there's not much to report on except the documents that get released. With Assange, it's a different case. There's a lot there for the media to make into a spectacle; and they have. It's not Assange trying to make the story about him, that's just how the media operates.
And there's another layer which needs to be peeled back. Go to any story about Snowden, Wikileaks, Assange, Manning, et al and you'll see, invariably, a common type of comment: "people" expressing their outrage that these persons are only in it for their own interests, wealth and fame. These comments pop up everywhere, and they're so ubiquitous and similar that I suspect they're part of NSA's, now confirmed, program [techdirt.com] to manipulate public opinion.
Then there are plenty of real people who see those comments, consider them, and think yes, that sounds reasonable. Then the media constantly reporting on Assange himself just fuels the cycle and reinforces their opinion that his actions are self-serving.
It's a huge con.
I don't respond to ACs.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Monday August 18 2014, @05:42PM
It's probably a mix of intent and media idiocy. Kind of like how during elections the media outlets focus on the horse race part as if it is a sporting event rather than on policy issues. It is much simpler to talk about the sporting aspects or the Entertainment Today personality aspects, than analyze real issues. Sadly, most people seem content with (or even prefer) that sort of reporting too. Authorities can take this predilection for the trivial rampant in the press, and further it along, but I don't think the NSA or other government org would be quite so successful at it if the seeds for that success were not already planted.
So -- aside from apathy, this is why I never click on stories of a pure political horse race nature, or sports, or entertainment no matter how click-baity the Bieber headline may be. If all the clicks went away, they'd certainly try something else, and who knows, it could be real reporting. /pipeDream
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Monday August 18 2014, @06:43PM
I'm glad you reminded people about the JTRIG program to manipulate public opinion. It's a very serious breach for the NSA and GCHQ to undermine public discourse that way, and it will ultimately guarantee, not prevent, their hanging. If you sabotage public discourse like that you prevent it from finding a peaceful, gradual channel to reform and growth; the underlying pressures producing that dissent will only mount higher and higher until they explode in unpredictable ways.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 19 2014, @09:42AM
And then you can be easily portrayed as a radical terrorist and locked up, for the children's safety, of course.
The main purpose of JTRIG is not to defuse all dissent, it's to separate those who can be defused from those who will go on no matter what, and then put the latter on watchlists.
(Score: 0, Troll) by evilviper on Monday August 18 2014, @06:46PM
You're kidding, right? Assange was the one spouting off every crazy conspiracy theory he could come up with, in every media outlet that would listen to him, to engender support and sympathy for him, all trying to evade facing charges of sexual assault.
Roman Polanski did it better...
Hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18 2014, @07:14PM
After all that's come out from Snowden et al you're still making fun of people for being conspiracy theorists? Open your damn eyes, they were right all along. It's worse than they even thought.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18 2014, @10:45PM
The Swedish authorities -already- interrogated Assange and allowed him to leave.
What followed was NOT law enforcement; it was USA imperialism.
.
President Evo Morales of Bolivia was mentioned further up the thread.
On his flight back from Europe, the USA contacted those countries which allow themselves to be under the USA's thumb and insisted that the aircraft not be allowed to land and refuel.
This left a limited number of places to land, whereupon the plane of a country's Chief Executive was treated like a drug smuggler's.[1]
The reach of USA imperialism is very long.
The rule of law and diplomatic courtesy are things the USA gov't abandoned long ago.
The collusion of Austria, Italy, France, and Spain in the Morales affair is shameful.
Sweden's collusion with the USA in the Assange affair is shameful.
Anyone who defends any of this has very low morals and an extremely high tolerance for authoritarianism.
...and I can't believe anyone considers Hillary a viable presidential candidate.
That hyper-militarist bitch could only make Americans even more hated across the globe.
[1] With in-air refueling and a worldwide US Air Force presence, Air Force One can stay airborne indefinitely, so this is an insult that a USA president would never have to endure.
A pity. Reciprocity would deliver a well-deserved lesson in manners.
-- gewg_
(Score: 1, Troll) by evilviper on Monday August 18 2014, @11:57PM
He has nothing to do with Assange. Completely unrelated event.
You have no evidence to support that claim. Assange is not under indictment or otherwise being pursued by the US. The US could have asked for Assange to be extradited the first time he was in custody, but did not. There's no evidence they will do so when he finally faces trial.
Hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 19 2014, @12:11AM
Are you serious????
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 19 2014, @02:02AM
Evo Morales
has nothing to do with Assange
True. My error. The name associated with that act of USA imperialism is Snowden.
Second verse, same as the first.
no evidence
...except that they had already picked him up, questioned him, and told him he was free to leave.
I find your willingness to excuse obvious gov't abuse troubling.
-- gewg_
(Score: 1, Troll) by evilviper on Tuesday August 19 2014, @02:19AM
I find the excessive tightness of your aluminum foil hat troubling.
Hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18 2014, @10:52PM
> You're kidding, right? Assange was the one spouting off every crazy conspiracy theory
> he could come up with, in every media outlet that would listen to him, to engender
> support and sympathy for him,
Again, in a story where Assange is the center of events it should be no surprise that he's talking about himself.
But in the broader picture about Wikileaks in general he hasn't been particularly self-centered.
(Score: 2) by Theophrastus on Monday August 18 2014, @05:41PM
It's a correlated feature of those who stand up to power that you probably don't frequently want to have lunch with them. Just examine any list of whistle-blowers and activists and imagine dealing with them on a day-to-day basis. Yet any society which tries to recognize the rule of law owes these sorts of folks a debt of gratitude. (Who watches the watchers often don't smell the sweetest)
(largely unrelated to that, i really think, accepting i've no standing to judge!, that the sexual assault charge is largely a poorly orchestrated smear of Assange. could be valid issues there, for sure. but they're more likely a civil court case than something that should factor toward extradition)
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Monday August 18 2014, @06:50PM
Assange is an intelligent and articulate guy. He's a bit of a drama queen, but in my book that doesn't detract from his mission. You could even argue that it's necessary to be larger-than-life to rise above the background noise. Also, when you're throwing rocks at powerful people and institutions you're most likely not doing it for the money, because money tends to follow compliance to the status quo. Tilting at windmills is exhausting business. So admiration from followers is one way to replenish your psychic energy; if those followers tend to be attractive it certainly doesn't hurt. In that Assange is like everyone else who ever challenged the status quo.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1) by arslan on Tuesday August 19 2014, @02:49AM
Eh? So he's a scumbag, but he's proven how derailed the US government is - if one is willing to admit and see it. That of course does not excuse whatever he has done, if he did, to those women. Violating international appropriateness and back dealing/strong-arming governments/politicians just to find out what he's done exactly is way worse.
The fact you hear more about Assange is not because of himself, its because of the US government and its witch hunt. It sums things up alright, you just seemed to be summing it up wrongly.