Skip to main content

In the face of global criticism and possible revocation of its diplomatic status in Britain, Ecuador has decided to grant WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange political asylum.

Why would Ecuador grant asylum to a professional hacker, albeit the most famous one, and a probable sexual deviant?  Why is Ecuador using this unpopular internet pariah to give the ultimate “F**k” you to the UK?

The answer to that question goes back further than the eight weeks Assange has been holed up in the Ecuador Embassy in London, avoiding extradition to Sweden for rape charges.

The answer lies in the immediate response given by Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino on behalf of left-leaning President Rafael Correa:  “We want to be very clear, we are not a British colony.  The colonial times are OVER.”

Correa once joked to Reuters that he saw Assange as a fellow member of “the club of the persecuted.”  Threat of persecution was the very justification that Minister Patino gave as to why Ecuador granted the asylum request.

Yes, Ecuador’s government has a persecution complex that has been aptly used by Correa to keep his people distracted.  If he keeps talking about those nasty ‘colonists’ those overreaching ‘imperialists’  Ecuadorians might not notice that their human rights are often infringed on, and that there is less to eat.

Let’s hope Assange keeps his mouth shut and doesn’t point out that the very freedoms he represents to his supporters Correa squashes.  Ecuador is usually on some international list as being one of the more corrupt and least transparent governments in Latin America.  Ecuador is also known for having one of the most ‘repressed’ economies in the world.

Or maybe Ecuador, knowing that the U.S. is looking to talk to Assange, was giving the “F*k” to them and Chevron Corp.  The U.S. oil giant has an $18 billion judgment for massive environment abuses in the country dating back to the ‘60s.

Ecuador suffered like many other countries under 300-years of Spanish colonial rule and saw its population decimated by disease and enslavement.  It has struggled to find its voice and way as a democratic republic.  So maybe an “Fk” you was necessary from those that aren’t able to move past the past but not with Assange as the instrument of that message.

For his part Assange played his cards right and sought asylum in a country’s embassy that isn’t looking to make friends with the U.S. or Britain.  A country that several years ago defaulted on billions in foreign debt and rewrote the constitution at the will of its President.  A country that would use him to make a social injustice statement while he uses them to save his ass from prison.  Maybe even Assange sees himself as a victim of the very colonists that some Ecuadorians continue to feel wronged by.

Now what?

Assange will probably be arrested when he attempts to leave the Ecuador Embassy in London to catch a flight to Quito.  For his part Correa will probably enjoy a surge in popularity especially amongst the young that are fans of Assange and his freedom of the press mantra.

Maybe if Assange is able to escape out of London into Ecuador he can figure out how to get computers, internet or maybe even roads to the rural poor, who are Correa’s biggest supporters, before they give him an “F*k’ you and vote him out of office.

Read more at Hispanically Speaking News

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  more corrupt than.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias

    Bolivia? Paraguay? Nicaragua? Colombia? Nicaragua? Honduras? El Salvador? Suriname? Guatemala?  Guyana?
    While demonstrably true that the Ecuadorian government is corrupt, it is nearly impossible to claim that it is more corrupt than any of those countries.  And those countries account for half of Latin America, so Ecuador cannot be reasonably claimed to be one of the more corrupt countries in LA.  And that's not even taking into account the legacies of corruption in Peru, Brasil, Argentina, Chile and Mexico.  Sheeeeeet, Ecuador may be the LEAST corrupt country of all those, historically.

    Perhaps Correa is pulling this off to garner a bit of reprieve from the issues that trouble Ecuador and his government, but it's still the right thing to do.  Nor does it make Assange a parasite for seeking refuge with them.

    I fail to see what is sexually deviant about having admittedly consensual, heterosexual sex with women.  The women aren't even pressing charges, the Swedish gov't is, almost assuredly at the behest of the US gov't.  While this story is important, the tone of your diary attempts to belittle Assange and the Ecuadorian act of granting asylum in every single sentence.  Pathetic.

    •  In general, yes. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sebastianguy99

      There are organizations that analyze this sort of stuff, you know.

      Of the nations you mention (I'll call anything +- 0.2 "tied"):

      Bolivia: tied
      Paraguay: worse
      Nigaragua:  tied
      Columbia: better
      Nicaragua:  tied
      El Slvador: better
      Suriname: better
      Guatemala: tied
      Guyana: tied
      Peru: better
      Brasil: notably better
      Argentina: better
      Chile: profoundly better
      Mexico: better

      I fail to see what is sexually deviant about having admittedly consensual, heterosexual sex with women.
      Are you that detached from reality that you think this is what's being charged?
      •  charged? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        crose

        not yet.  The Swedes want to question him, to "make up their minds if they even want to charge him".  So saying that he's been charged is false.  That's not detached from reality.
        Both women have stated that they were involved in consensual sexual relationships with Assange.  The charges only arose because one found out that he had sex with the other, and after that it becomes much more difficult to ascertain what actually happened.  One woman (perhaps both) claim that after having sex with him, with consent, that she/they woke up with him having sex with them.  That would be rape.  His allegation is that they had both been awake at the onset of foreplay/sexy time.  What actually transpired is completely unknown by anyone but the 3 of them, but all 3 acknowledge that consensual sex took place.  Both women declined to press charges, but the Swedish authorities took it upon themselves to bring the case against Assange.  Have i demonstrated how detached from reality i am?

        •  Incorrect. (0+ / 0-)
          The Swedes want to question him, to "make up their minds if they even want to charge him
          False.  From the prosecutor herself:
          B. The aim of the EAW

          5. Julian Assange's surrender is sought in order that he may be subjected to criminal proceedings.

          Have i demonstrated how detached from reality i am?
          More than sufficiently, but let's keep going.
          The charges only arose because one found out that he had sex with the other
          False.  The charges (you can use the same reference if you want) are fourfold:

          1) On 13th-14th August 2010, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange, by using violence, forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party’s arms and a forceful spreading of her legs while lying on top of her and with his body weight preventing her from moving or shifting.

          2) On 13-14 August 2010, in home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity. Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, consummated sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge.

          3) On 18 August 2010 or on any of the days before or after that date, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Julian Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity; that is, lying next to her and pressing his naked, erect penis to her body.

          4) On 17 August 2010, in the home of the injured party in Enköping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state. It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party’s sexual integrity.

          Both women have stated that they were involved in consensual sexual relationships with Assange.  ... but all 3 acknowledge that consensual sex took place.
          Are you really going there?  Are you really implying that date rape, the most common form of rape, is justified?  Because that's the implication of your continued pointing out that there had been consent previously, under different constraints, and using that to justify a person doing whatever they want at a later date without consent (and in fact, with specific explicit refusal of consent to said acts).

          Lets be abundant-fucking-ly clear here: HAVING SEX WITH A SLEEPING PERSON TO WORK AROUND THEIR REFUSAL TO CONSENT TO THE SEX ACT THAT YOU WANT IS RAPE.  There is no ifs, ands, buts, or gray areas about this.   That is what he is charged with.  Actually, only one of four things he's charged with.  How dare you try to excuse that with "they had sex earlier"!

          His allegation is that they had both been awake at the onset of foreplay/sexy time.
          His claim is absurd (and, FYI, his defense team claims she was "half asleep", as if that's oh-so-fucking-much better, and has not disputed that she had been refusing unprotected sex before she fell asleep).  There's more than enough testimony that she had a right proper freakout after Assange was gone (she started calling friends in a panic, went to the hospital, etc), that she had never in her life had unprotected sex, even with her previous, multi-year boyfriend, that it was "unthinkable" to her, and on and on.  Her reactions to her friends are fully consistent with someone who just had sex against her will, and I say this as someone who has been in that situation.
          •  fair enough (0+ / 0-)
            Are you really going there?  Are you really implying that date rape, the most common form of rape, is justified?
            no, which is why i said
            she/they woke up with him having sex with them.  That would be rape.
            As for the rest, yes, those allegations certainly deserve full investigation.  
      •  as to your rankings (0+ / 0-)

        my use of the term "historically" was intended to refer to: the fact that Chile executed it's sitting president in a coup.  That's more corrupt than anything Ecuador has ever done.  Brasil was ruled with an iron grip by a military dictatorship for 20 years and was awash in corruption (although it's more recent governments have improved).  Argentina also participated in a "dirty war" where dissidents were disappeared and murdered, and whose children were then "adopted".  That's corrupt.  Colombia, not Columbia, continues to extrajudicially murder dissidents through paramilitary activities and suck up billions of dollars a year from the US to fight the war on drugs which the gov't also perpetuates and profits from.  I fail to see how Ecuador's corruption is worse than those activities.

  •  Have you even bothered to read the statement (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    brasilaaron, halef, Sean X, jennylind

    of the Ecuadorian foreign minister?  Statement.

    He makes a powerful case.

    The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

    by lysias on Thu Aug 16, 2012 at 11:40:01 AM PDT

  •  Good for Ecuador. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    halef, jennylind

    You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment.-- Francis Urqhart

    by Johnny Q on Thu Aug 16, 2012 at 12:27:50 PM PDT

  •  Ecuador's reasoning (0+ / 0-)

    Kevin Gosztola, in his blog at firedoglake posted on Ecuador's decision and this situation.

    Resistance Is Fertile - Occupy

    by Sean X on Thu Aug 16, 2012 at 01:39:19 PM PDT

  •  You lost me at (0+ / 0-)

    "probable sexual deviant".

    http://ferrada-noli.blogspot.com/...

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site