Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday December 27 2018, @12:18AM   Printer-friendly
from the can't-get-there-from-here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIJBUZm1HoY dept.

Like any techno-political soap opera watcher, I've on occasion wondered why it is so damned hard for Julian Assange to get away from that embassy.

Riddle me this: you've been stuck in a little room in Equador's embassy in London for 8 years. You can't leave without getting arrested and most likely extradited.

A few countries not friendly to the U.S., but most notably Russia, have tried to figure out how to get you out of there

Your crimes are mostly pissing off people in power in the way journalists really should, but there is also compelling evidence of at least one actual crime — that you provided material assistance to someone hacking secret information. If the U.S. gets hold of you, you can pretty much count on paying the piper.

Still, you have hordes of supporters, and even entire countries with not insignificant resources willing to give a hand if only to tweak the nose of the U.S.

Diplomatic vehicles, helicopters, disguises, being made an ambassador yourself, just plain sneaking out... nothing has panned out.

So what are your options? Jetpack? Smuggle in parts of a drone capable of carrying a person? VTOL car? Urban ghillie suit? Rocket skates? Dig a tunnel in the basement? It seems hard to believe that the bored lax surveillance of 8 years on can't be defeated by a motivated technogencia.

You've probably only got one shot...so how would you do it?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by takyon on Thursday December 27 2018, @04:36AM (1 child)

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Thursday December 27 2018, @04:36AM (#778899) Journal

    International law is a farce. Realpolitik is how the world actually works.

    London cops could just train an infrared imager on the embassy and see that a human was being smuggled in a bag. Then they would arrest both people. And Ecuador can't do shit about it. UK would face no real consequences and could veto anything that comes up before the UN Security Council (but nothing would come up).

    But the scenario is academic. In reality, the current Ecuadorean government is tired of Assange and wants closer ties with the UK. They are closer than ever to getting rid of him. Assange is lucky they haven't just kicked him out onto the street with no warning. Maybe they will get something in return from the UK if they handle it the right way.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/06/world/americas/julian-assange-ecuador-lenin-moreno.html [nytimes.com]

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=1, Informative=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2) by legont on Friday December 28 2018, @04:39AM

    by legont (4179) on Friday December 28 2018, @04:39AM (#779237)

    Intended to ensure the confidentially of diplomatic papers and communiques, the diplomatic pouch has evolved over centuries into a cornerstone of diplomatic practice. While diplomatic pouches have traditionally been bags along the lines of ‘canvas sacks’[1], the Vienna Convention places no limitations on either the size or weight of containers with clear diplomatic markings and official seals. The treaty explicitly bars the transportation of any objects not intended for official usage in diplomatic bags while conversely holding such bags and their contents as sacrosanct. The pouches are exempt from even non-invasive security procedures such as “metal detectors, electronic scanning, or canine sniffing without opening or detaining the bag.”[2] Thus, in practice, there is no lawful method by which customs authorities in the host country may ascertain whether diplomatic bags are being utilized for illegitimate purposes and the system operates on the good-faith expectation on the part of the states and their representatives.

    The inviolability of the diplomatic pouch under current international law thus represents a substantial challenge to officials charged with preventing RN trafficking, smuggling, and terrorism. Despite the inherent risks that unscreened diplomatic bags may contain objects or materials designed to cause harm or circumvent laws, there is little political appetite, either in the United States or abroad, to change the established system.[8] Thus, unless and until an incident of such magnitude occurs which renders inaction untenable, the diplomatic pouch will in all likelihood remain immune from even the most basic screening procedures, continuing to serve as a potential source of intrusion for smugglers and those with more nefarious aims.

    https://www.cbrneportal.com/tradition-or-threat-the-diplomatic-pouch-and-the-potential-for-rn-smuggling/ [cbrneportal.com]

    It appears that so far nobody ever tried to challenge the rule, even the US. It may change all right, but it would be big - way bigger than some guy in an obscure embassy.

    --
    "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.