As usual for media circus threads, please share your bouquets and brickbats for particular items in the mass media, or highlight cogent analysis elsewhere, on any current sociopolitical issue.
tigtog (aka Viv) is the founder of this blog. She lives in Sydney, Australia: husband, 2 kids, cat, house, garden, just enough wine-racks and (sigh) far too few bookshelves.
This author has written 3283 posts for Hoyden About Town. Read more about tigtog »
tigtog – my view is that Ryan as VP choice by Romney is a great decision because it makes it more likely that Obama will get re-elected :-)
YetAnotherMattAugust 16, 2012 at 7:23 am | Permalink
Chris, the view I’m currently holding is that this will be a Pyrrhic victory, in that even though the centrists are more likely to win, Ryan and right wing stupidity will be more mainstream.
Mindy, all I saw on the news yesterday was about Nauru. I’ve heard a bit this morning about the plain packaging though.
CMMC, I’m with Liss at Shakesville on this one: Do I think Assange should potentially face the death penalty in the US for leaking classified information? Absolutely not. Do I think Assange should be unilaterally supported and the allegations of sexual assault ignored because he might get extradited to the US and might stand trial? No.
Chris/Matt, it’s worse than just right wing stupidity, it’s Randroid extremist stupidity. Nuking it from orbit is the only way to be sure levels of toxic WTF that is getting a free ride into the Overton Window.
I’m with you TT, although at the moment I’d be happy if they gave him a bloody escort to the airport and put him on the bloody plane to Ecuador. At least that way I might have to stop hearing about him every five minutes. This doesn’t do justice for either Manning or the women in Sweden but it does deprive him of the oxygen of publicity.
Just saw a bit of MSM about it, and it looks like it’s mostly diplomatic sabre rattling at the moment – Ecuador said it’s seriously considering granting asylum to Assange, the UK government has reminded them that it can rescind the diplomatic immunity status of the embassy building any time, and the police are stationed outside to prevent any attempts to move Assange somewhere else. It doesn’t look like they’re actually planning to enter the embassy at the moment.
YetAnotherMatt – mainstream exposure of Ryan’s views are maybe a good thing though. There’s the risk that they may become more acceptable, but there is also the hope that the general population becomes aware of what people like Ryan actually want to do. Its got as much chance of energizing the Democrat base as the Tea Party base.
Mindy/Tigtog – removing diplomatic status of the embassy seems like a very high risk strategy for the UK for very little potential gain. Not only do they risk making him into even more of a martyr and fuelling more conspiracy theories (when if ever has a country has taken this sort of action over a rape charge?) but it sets a precedent for all of their embassies around the world. They did it to Ecuador, so every other country would feel justified doing it to them whenever it suits.
It covers some of the barriers we put up to asylum seekers who attempt to use the much safer option of flying in, as well as other factors that push people to attempt sea voyages.
The whole sabre rattling at the Ecuadorians stinks to me of some sort of attempted Sir Humphrey manoeuvre, probably meant to push the Ecuadorians into finally making a decision so that Assange becomes totally their problem and the UK could heave a sigh of relief. Like so many such cunning plans, it appears to be hurtling way past mayhem and well into clusterfuck territory.
tigtog – even if the Ecuadorians grant Assange asylum its not the end, because they can’t get him out of the country unless the UK agree (which they have said they won’t do). So the circus is far from over.
I can’t believe the UK put the threat in writing though – that will definitely fuel the conspiracy theories. Even when a policewoman was shot and killed from the Libyan embassy they respected diplomatic immunity (although they expelled them all).
I have to say someone has done an excellent job of trolling claiming that the British were about to raid the Ecuadorian Embassy. Was it the embassy, wikileaks or someone else?
Interesting article about single point failures. I hadn’t thought of this in terms of organisations before, but would be fascinating to look at in more depth.
The UK Foreign Office sent a ‘note’ [to whom?? not clear- the embassy?] that said they would have the right to enter the embassy and remove Assange under the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1967. The UK govt are reiterating that they never said they would ‘raid’ the embassy, but may take up their legal rights. However, I can see that this can be ‘read’ as the same thing!
Absolutely, but I don’t think it was actually happening yesterday which is what was being suggested by Wikileaks and all over Twitter. Someone even claimed there was a DDos attack (have I got that acronym right) on the website of the Ecuadorean Embassy. Wonderful trolling by whoever was responsible. I hope nothing horrible happens in Ecuador anytime soon that they need international aid for.
Mindy – probably just got exaggerated beyond the initial reports whilst spreading around Twitter. That happens all the time. People see tweets without enough context and start coming to erroneous conclusions. I think its pretty clear that the UK did intend to communicate that they could enter the embassy if they wanted to though.
DDOS attacks on websites related to high profile news stories happen quite regularly so I wouldn’t see it as anything special.
I’d be quite disappointed if the Australian or UK governments refused to send aid to Ecuador if there was a natural disaster. It would reflect pretty badly on them, and I rather doubt they would take that approach.
Interestingly I heard a Swedish representative saying that they may now be forced to send an investigator to the UK to question Assange (something Assange has been open to). That may at least resolve whether they decide to charge him or not.
Yes I was probably a bit harsh about the aid thing. But I think that diplomatic tensions between the UK and Ecuador will be high for a while and I suspect that there won’t be any favourable trade term deals or suchlike being made anytime soon.
So has he actually been granted asylum or is that all a rumour as well?
So has he actually been granted asylum or is that all a rumour as well?
There was an official announcement yesterday.
Ecuador’s trade agreement with the US is under renegotiation at the moment and this decision isn’t going to help, but as the article you posted points out Ecuador’s president isn’t exactly on the US’s good list anyway.
From all I’ve read about Ecuador (which is not much) the president seems to be your standard south american semi-dictator (elected, but widely misuses power to retain power). But if they have anti-US sentiments its not without reason – the US and other countries have a track record of interfering in the domestic politics of countries in that region.
From Assange’s point of view he’s probably just finding refuge where he can. Even if he gets to Ecuador, the time he’ll have to spend there will be a lot longer than any prison sentence he’d receive in Sweden and there’s no long term guarantee of his safety (change of government for example)
Also? Romney-Ryan? Arrgh-Eww-Yuk.
Did anyone watch the news tonight? Did the PM get any good press for the win against tobacco companies?
Ecuador’s president, Rafael Correa, has agreed to grant Julian Assange asylum.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/14/julian-assange-asylum-ecuador-wikileaks
tigtog – my view is that Ryan as VP choice by Romney is a great decision because it makes it more likely that Obama will get re-elected :-)
Chris, the view I’m currently holding is that this will be a Pyrrhic victory, in that even though the centrists are more likely to win, Ryan and right wing stupidity will be more mainstream.
Mindy, all I saw on the news yesterday was about Nauru. I’ve heard a bit this morning about the plain packaging though.
CMMC, I’m with Liss at Shakesville on this one:
Chris/Matt, it’s worse than just right wing stupidity, it’s Randroid extremist stupidity. levels of toxic WTF that is getting a free ride into the Overton Window.
I’m with you TT, although at the moment I’d be happy if they gave him a bloody escort to the airport and put him on the bloody plane to Ecuador. At least that way I might have to stop hearing about him every five minutes. This doesn’t do justice for either Manning or the women in Sweden but it does deprive him of the oxygen of publicity.
Twitter tells me that the Metropolitan Police have entered or are at least threatening to enter the Ecuadorian Embassy to recover Assange.
Just saw a bit of MSM about it, and it looks like it’s mostly diplomatic sabre rattling at the moment – Ecuador said it’s seriously considering granting asylum to Assange, the UK government has reminded them that it can rescind the diplomatic immunity status of the embassy building any time, and the police are stationed outside to prevent any attempts to move Assange somewhere else. It doesn’t look like they’re actually planning to enter the embassy at the moment.
FFS this is getting ridiculous. Does anyone know why they are doing this?
YetAnotherMatt – mainstream exposure of Ryan’s views are maybe a good thing though. There’s the risk that they may become more acceptable, but there is also the hope that the general population becomes aware of what people like Ryan actually want to do. Its got as much chance of energizing the Democrat base as the Tea Party base.
Mindy/Tigtog – removing diplomatic status of the embassy seems like a very high risk strategy for the UK for very little potential gain. Not only do they risk making him into even more of a martyr and fuelling more conspiracy theories (when if ever has a country has taken this sort of action over a rape charge?) but it sets a precedent for all of their embassies around the world. They did it to Ecuador, so every other country would feel justified doing it to them whenever it suits.
People might be interested in this excellent, albeit depressing feature from Mike Steketee at the Global Mail: You Heard We’re Stopping The Boats? You Heard Wrong.
It covers some of the barriers we put up to asylum seekers who attempt to use the much safer option of flying in, as well as other factors that push people to attempt sea voyages.
The whole sabre rattling at the Ecuadorians stinks to me of some sort of attempted Sir Humphrey manoeuvre, probably meant to push the Ecuadorians into finally making a decision so that Assange becomes totally their problem and the UK could heave a sigh of relief. Like so many such cunning plans, it appears to be hurtling way past mayhem and well into clusterfuck territory.
Also this:
I reckon if you did this on a TV show viewers would hit Twitter and FB with complaints that it wasn’t realistic!
Hmmm, some whispers now that it isn’t realistic…
Maybe we could stop hearing about this if Bernard arranged a royal pregnancy?
tigtog – even if the Ecuadorians grant Assange asylum its not the end, because they can’t get him out of the country unless the UK agree (which they have said they won’t do). So the circus is far from over.
I can’t believe the UK put the threat in writing though – that will definitely fuel the conspiracy theories. Even when a policewoman was shot and killed from the Libyan embassy they respected diplomatic immunity (although they expelled them all).
YetAnotherMatt – Well apparently Prince Harry *must* marry soon! That might distract them a bit …. http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/celebrity/why-prince-harry-must-marry–soon-20120816-249oy.html
I hate to say it, but I am all out of fucks to give for Julian Assange.
Maybe the US can send an ‘extraction’ team to remove him from the embassy, this time trying not to execute the suspect in the process?
http://plashingvole.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/julian-assange-summary-for-dimwits.html
Interesting post from The Plashing Vole. Unfortunate use of ableist language in the title.
I have to say someone has done an excellent job of trolling claiming that the British were about to raid the Ecuadorian Embassy. Was it the embassy, wikileaks or someone else?
http://techpresident.com/news/22729/why-julian-assange-wikileaks-single-point-failure
Interesting article about single point failures. I hadn’t thought of this in terms of organisations before, but would be fascinating to look at in more depth.
The UK Foreign Office sent a ‘note’ [to whom?? not clear- the embassy?] that said they would have the right to enter the embassy and remove Assange under the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1967. The UK govt are reiterating that they never said they would ‘raid’ the embassy, but may take up their legal rights. However, I can see that this can be ‘read’ as the same thing!
Absolutely, but I don’t think it was actually happening yesterday which is what was being suggested by Wikileaks and all over Twitter. Someone even claimed there was a DDos attack (have I got that acronym right) on the website of the Ecuadorean Embassy. Wonderful trolling by whoever was responsible. I hope nothing horrible happens in Ecuador anytime soon that they need international aid for.
Mindy – probably just got exaggerated beyond the initial reports whilst spreading around Twitter. That happens all the time. People see tweets without enough context and start coming to erroneous conclusions. I think its pretty clear that the UK did intend to communicate that they could enter the embassy if they wanted to though.
DDOS attacks on websites related to high profile news stories happen quite regularly so I wouldn’t see it as anything special.
I’d be quite disappointed if the Australian or UK governments refused to send aid to Ecuador if there was a natural disaster. It would reflect pretty badly on them, and I rather doubt they would take that approach.
Interestingly I heard a Swedish representative saying that they may now be forced to send an investigator to the UK to question Assange (something Assange has been open to). That may at least resolve whether they decide to charge him or not.
Yes I was probably a bit harsh about the aid thing. But I think that diplomatic tensions between the UK and Ecuador will be high for a while and I suspect that there won’t be any favourable trade term deals or suchlike being made anytime soon.
So has he actually been granted asylum or is that all a rumour as well?
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/08/why-ecuadors-embassy-stand-off-with-the-uk-might-not-actually-be-about-protecting-julian-assange/261221/
There was an official announcement yesterday.
Ecuador’s trade agreement with the US is under renegotiation at the moment and this decision isn’t going to help, but as the article you posted points out Ecuador’s president isn’t exactly on the US’s good list anyway.
From all I’ve read about Ecuador (which is not much) the president seems to be your standard south american semi-dictator (elected, but widely misuses power to retain power). But if they have anti-US sentiments its not without reason – the US and other countries have a track record of interfering in the domestic politics of countries in that region.
From Assange’s point of view he’s probably just finding refuge where he can. Even if he gets to Ecuador, the time he’ll have to spend there will be a lot longer than any prison sentence he’d receive in Sweden and there’s no long term guarantee of his safety (change of government for example)
A mild snort of hilarity making the rounds: “Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan” anagrams to “My Ultimate Ayn Rand Porn”.