Mr Julian Assange was convicted by a judge in Westminster Magistrates Court of a charge relating to his failure to answer to bail who referred him to Southwark Crown Court for sentencing. Not surprisingly perhaps, bail was denied and he is currently a guest of Her Majesty. He will reappear at Westminster in connection with a request for an Extradition Warrant from the United States on May 2. [This does get juicier later!] The judge ruled that the US must bring its extradition case by June 12. The Swedish authorities have already been granted an extradition warrant relating to an alleged sexual assault and there are indications they may wish to re-open the matter.
The Ecuadorian authorities had revoked his citizenship on Thursday morning “for irregularities in his application”; advised he no longer had diplomatic protection and was required to leave the Embassy in which he had been granted asylum. At the invitation of the Ecuadorian authorities, officers from the Metropolitan Police had entered the apartment which houses the embassy and arrested Mr Assange under a warrant issued at the time he first absconded. His removal from the embassy was videoed by the only camera operator or crew from a news organisation present:
OK enough of the po-faced reporting, what’s been going on? Well hopefully I can throw a little light on the past few weeks. First up tho, the observant among you may notice that RT has rather rudely slapped their logo and an “exclusive” banner over a video clearly bearing the logo Ruptly. Not really, Ruptly is the German agency owned by RT which is itself a Russian state organisation. I’ll go into why perhaps they were the only news agency present later.
Now, the apparent crowd surfing by Assange? Well likely he had his legs restrained by the police to prevent him hurting himself or others during the arrest. Police carry such restraints just in case. There would have been Health and Safety implications of trying to take him out and down the stairs of the embassy. In addition he had been reported to be in ill health recently. Other positions to carry him would have left his legs more mobile and coming down feet first might have been an unfortunate image. Alright, there was another reason. As the Sun breathlessly put it:
Now it has been revealed that his swift arrest was designed to stop him pressing an emergency panic button.
Ecuador's foreign minister Jose Valencia said audio recordings from a few months ago captured Assange threatening ambassador Jaime Merchan with pressing the button which would have "devastating consequences" for the embassy if he was arrested.
British authorities were told about the threat — which cops acted on by not allowing Assange to return to his room in the embassy during his arrest to carry out any secret plans.
I don’t usually quote the Sun but it is sometimes useful to know what the line being handed out is.
Now to go through some of the things which should clear up some of the various theories and allegations about plots or conspiracies. First the timeline is important. the earliest part of shows that the police already had a warrant to arrest Assange. Unfortunately the timeline is so long that it is best used as footnotes to my increasingly long diatribe, so “the first shall be last” or at least at the end.
You will all want to know about the two most important characters in all this. I am afraid Chelsea Manning’s situation is unchanged but the cat is OK! (see November 17, 2018)
Then there are the various allegations of collusion between this or that country, or both, or all.
One is easily put to bed. Of course the Ecuadorians told the British that Assange was about to have his citizenship revoked and be told politely to “go forth and multiply”. The British would have been advised and issued with an invitation for the Metropolitan Police to enter their embassy in London by the Ecuadorian Foreign Ministry via the Ambassador. Obviously they thought Assange might be disruptive when he was told. The British authorities are more than willing to fulfil their duties under the Vienna Conventions to protect the property and personnel of foreign embassies. Especially if it means they can effect a seven year old arrest warrant.
The police entered as discretely as possible, as shown by them wearing civilian clothes when they carried him out. There were uniformed police outside were controlling passing traffic round the prisoner-transport van they had brought. Others were shown by Ruptly down narrow side streets. They were wearing “low key” crowd control gear of a shirt and equipment waistcoat. (Full riot gear would be nearby) Clearly the police were anticipating possible demonstrations to disrupt the arrest.
That sort of operation had to be planned. It takes time to assemble the teams, transport and equipment. There had to be advance warning of at least a day so in this case collusion between the British and Ecuadorian authorities is clearly demonstrated. It doen’t address why only Ruptly were there so the plot thickens on that one. But there’s more…!
I think we can ignore “bribes” from the US to Ecuador. They were perhaps more a case of the US offering and Ecuador waiting to see how much they could get for doing what they wanted to anyway. (“We gave them all they wanted and still the didn’t hand him over to my Federal marshmellows” D. Trump) Ecuador has wanted rid of him for years.
It cost up to 80% of their security agency’s budget to deal with “Assange related matters”. (see May 15, 2918) He was under round the clock surveillance and still managed to hack into their satellite dish to get internet access,compromising their communications security. (I remember noticing photos of workmen installing a new satellite dish cable on the side of the building. IIRC it was on GoogleEarth). All of his visitors were monitored and recorded (remember that Mr “I’ve got Nixon on my back”?) The cost rose when they installed a security company in a nearby apartment — which looks about the time the 24/7 Metropolitan Police operation was stood down. The police costs were certainly a cause of diplomatic friction between the two countries in the early years, amounting to several £millions.
The same article reveals that “Assange related matters” involved a two way street. Assange monitoring involved the previous regime acquiring details on the use of surveillance on their opponents. Ecuador’s new president (May 24, 2017) shut down the agency, Senain, in March 2018.
It is unclear how the Ecuadorian government used the surveillance tools. But investigative journalists working in Ecuador say they have often been forced to move their websites abroad to avoid cyber-attacks and hacking attempts. Others have been prosecuted through the courts. Facing fines and criminal charges, some were forced into exile.
Ecuador’s president, Lenín Moreno, shut down Senain in March in response to what he called the “ethical outcry of citizens”.
He said the move was intended to “guarantee the security needs of the country”, in what appeared to be a pointed reference to the resources the agency had dedicated to protecting a person who had very little to do with Ecuador’s security.
Mr Assange’s “Defender of Internet Freedom” halo starts to look a little dented — less DIF, more FBI. It certainly looks like getting the tools to monitor him meant they could monitor internal dissent.
There were other internal pressures on President Moreno to expel the viper from the nest. On January 30, 2019 Wikileaks released copies of Vatican documents including a letter from Pope Francis demanding a charity in Africa stop handing out condoms. When you are being sheltered by a predominantly Catholic country, it may not be a good idea to mess with the Bishop of Rome.
No doubt the British Foreign Office also weighed in about the situation and its cost. Probably to the extent that “Look old boy, the taxi meter’s still running waiting for Assange” responded to by “I’ll do what I can” is the toast over a glass or three when the Ambassador visits.
But for all the statements for the public about “ongoing discussions” (July 2018), the truth is that British or US pressure or inducements, if they existed, had no real effect on the decision by Ecuador. They just wanted him out. The only way he could be more of a pain in the rear is if you fell over his cat’s, or his, leavings.
The matter of any collusion on time lines or secret deals between the governments is concerned, in truth there was no need. Here Assange seems to have been hoist with his own petard. One line struck me in the report from the Guardian.
By penetrating the embassy’s firewall, Assange was able to access and intercept the official and personal communications of staff, the source claimed.
While this brings the immediate thought “well if Assange can do it, any security service can” is true, is there a real need for that? It’s fanciful to imagine that communications between embassies and the home country are not monitored, If they are not, there’s something very amiss with your spooks. Other places using secure satellite uplinks? Well the downlinks aren’t focussed so if you have the odd place nearby, like an embassy perhaps, where you can locate a receiver dish; is that a problem? Some embassy roofs look like Trump has thrown a tantrum over a model radio telescope array.
I presume that Britain’s GCHQ had monitored Assange’s conversations perhaps with an Ecuadorean lawyer over the withdrawing of his citizenship. Ecuador telling him he had violated the agreement over his conduct at the Embassy on April 3 must have made ears prick up and at least one “Eye” open. We can also well imagine the telephone conversations that led up to it. In any case, it’s “you know we know you know we know” in these sorts of matters so usually friendly governments tell each other what’s going on. You even do it with friendly countries so you can slip in the odd bit of real “fake news” they may have missed.
So really, is there anything special about Assange that warranted any grand conspiracies or secret plots? Well not really, it’s diplomacy as usual. Oh, before I shrug my shoulders and slope off, there’s the little matter of how Ruptly became the only press there. Well remember, walls have ears. Who else would be listening in, especially a good employer looking after one of their companies’ workers. Mr Assange has of course made appearances on RT which owns Ruptly. Would that same owner not be interested in embarassing an advisary by showing a video of someone being haulded physically into a vehicle by what appear to be civilians? I wonder who that might be. You might suggest we should ask Mr Trump if he knows that person well. You might think that, I couldn’t possibly comment.
With that I leave you to not plow through the timeline but hope it serves as an aide memoir or reference sometimes.”
p.s. Why can you read the Ecuadorean president’s name like an anti-communist chant; “Lenin more? No!”. I need a drink.
That Time Line
- August 2010 - The Swedish Prosecutor's Office first issues an arrest warrant for Mr Assange. It says there are two separate allegations - one of rape and one of molestation. Mr Assange says the claims are "without basis"
- December 2010 - Mr Assange is arrested in London and bailed at the second attempt
- May 2012 - The UK's Supreme Court rules he should be extradited to Sweden to face questioning over the allegations
- June 2012 - Mr Assange enters the Ecuadorean embassy in London
- August 2012 - Ecuador grants asylum to Mr Assange, saying there are fears his human rights might be violated if he is extradited
- August 2015 - Swedish prosecutors drop their investigation into two allegations - one of sexual molestation and one of unlawful coercion because they have run out of time to question him. But he still faces the more serious accusation of rape
- October 2015 - Metropolitan Police announces that officers will no longer be stationed outside the Ecuadorean embassy
- February 2016 - A UN panel rules that Mr Assange has been "arbitrarily detained" by UK and Swedish authorities since 2010
- May 2017 - Sweden's director of public prosecutions announces that the rape investigation into Mr Assange is being dropped.
- May 24, 2017 Lenin Moreno installed as President of Ecudaor, start of a possible 2 x 4 year terms. He replaced Rafael Correa who had granted Assange asylum.
- May 15, 2018 The Guardian and others report on the extent and costs of the Ecudorian measures to monitor and protect Assange, including detailed surveillance which resulted in measures against Ecuadorians.
Ecuador’s comptroller is investigating how Senain spent $284.7m between 2012 and 2017, the majority of it on special expenses such as activities connected to Assange. About 80% of the overall budget went on such expenses last year, according to a statement on the comptroller’s website.
(The article also shows that Assange had interferred with the Embassy’s communications and likely that meant any intelligence agency could hack in)
- July 2018 - The UK and Ecuador confirm they are holding ongoing talks over the fate of Mr Assange
- October 2018 - Mr Assange is given a set of house rules by the Ecuadorean embassy
- October 2018 - It's revealed he is to launch legal action against the government of Ecuador - accusing it of violating his "fundamental rights and freedoms"
- November 15, 2018. The Washington Post reports that sealed charges against Assange had been inadvertently mentioned in a court report.
Federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of Virginia have long been investigating Assange and, in the Trump administration, had begun taking a second look at whether to charge members of the WikiLeaks oganization for the 2010 leak of diplomatic cables and military documents that the anti-secrecy group published. Investigators also had explored whether WikiLeaks could face criminal liability for the more recent revelation of sensitive CIA cybertools.
- November 20, 2018 La Repubblica report that “Assange has preferred to spare the cat an isolation which has become unbearable and allow it a healthier life.” (You know you wanted to know.)
- December 2018 - Mr Assange's lawyer rejects an agreement announced by Ecuador's president to see him leave the Ecuadorean embassy
- January 30, 2019 Wikileaks publishes documents from the Vatican indicating a power struggle for the head of the Kinghts of Malta
This ambiguous status cuts to the heart of the dispute as it reached a fever pitch after Pope Francis forced the abdication of Matthew Festing as Prince and Grand Master of the Order in January 2017. A month earlier Festing had dismissed the Order’s Grand Chancellor Albrecht Freiherr von Boeselager.
The reason for the dismissal is said to be that Boeselager, who served as health minister for the Order, was held personally responsible for having approved funds for an aid mission in Africa that distributed condoms, amongst other things. This directly contravenes Church teachings on contraception and Festing was adamant that Boeselager be held responsible.
- February 2019 - Australia grants Mr Assange a new passport amid fears Ecuador may bring his asylum to an end
Of course it does not end there. It’s fairly obvious that plain clothed police officers were already in the building as grey suits and black puffer jackets are not Met Police issue.
- April 3, 2019 USAToday reports that Ecuador told Assange he had violated the terms of his asylum.
In a speech to the Ecuadorian Broadcasting Association on Tuesday, Moreno accused the whistleblowing organization of intercepting phone calls and private conversations and also complained about “photos of my bedroom, what I eat, and how my wife and daughters and friends dance.”….
The Ecuadorean government, however, has said it believes the WikiLeaks organization shared the photos that depict a lavish lifestyle and date back several years, to when Moreno and his family lived in Geneva, The Guardian reports.
The indictment alleges that in March 2010, Assange engaged in a conspiracy with Chelsea Manning, ….
During the conspiracy, Manning and Assange engaged in real-time discussions regarding Manning’s transmission of classified records to Assange. The discussions also reflect Assange actively encouraging Manning to provide more information. During an exchange, Manning told Assange that “after this upload, that’s all I really have got left.” To which Assange replied, “curious eyes never run dry in my experience.”
Assange is charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion and is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison.