<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;"><DIV>Julian Assange and some of his supporters gave speeches in front of the Ecuadorian embassy in London on Sunday, August 19, 2012. The 45 minute youtube video is here: <A href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yr8d8BLBymI">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yr8d8BLBymI</A> Happy viewing!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>John Thielking<BR><BR>--- On <B>Thu, 8/16/12, John Thielking <I><pagesincolor@yahoo.com></I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><BR>From: John Thielking <pagesincolor@yahoo.com><BR>Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Ambassador Craig Murray on Assange<BR>To: "sosfbay-discuss@cagreens.org" <sosfbay-discuss@cagreens.org>, "Brian Good" <snug.bug@hotmail.com><BR>Date: Thursday, August 16, 2012, 9:08 PM<BR><BR>
<DIV id=yiv2039607882>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top>
<DIV>The blog posting that you are referencing is from 11:30AM August 16, 2012. Word came of Assange getting asylum at 1PM in London on August 16, 2012. According to the broadcast on <A href="http://www.rt.com/" rel=nofollow target=_blank>www.rt.com</A> at about 12PM PST August 16, 2012, the spokesperson for the UK rescinded the threat to storm the embassy. Also, an article published at 17:00 EST August 16, 2012 here <BR><A href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2189515/The-WikiLeaks-siege-fiasco-As-tiny-Ecuador-saves-Assange-extradition-granting-asylum-40-police-surround-embassy--steps-outside-ll-pounce.html" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2189515/The-WikiLeaks-siege-fiasco-As-tiny-Ecuador-saves-Assange-extradition-granting-asylum-40-police-surround-embassy--steps-outside-ll-pounce.html</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>says that the threat to storm the embassy was a mistake.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Currently, the only news is that 4 hours ago wikileaks tweeted onto Facebook that 35 police officers were still surrounding the embassy (12:30AM London time August 17, 2012).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Both live streams that were covering the situation in the early morning of August 16, 2012 are currently not broadcasting live feeds. They are located at:</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://bambuser.com/v/2905636" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://bambuser.com/v/2905636</A></DIV>
<DIV>(this one is currently broadcasting a recording from August 16, 2012)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>and</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://www.ustream.tv/channel/occupynewsnetwork" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.ustream.tv/channel/occupynewsnetwork</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>According to the rt.com broadcast just now, Mr Hauge of the UK Foreign Office denied that his office ever issued a threat to storm the embassy. Ecuador says that they recieved a letter saying that the UK might storm the embassy. The rt.com web site is currently too busy to handle requests. rt is broadcast on Comcast channel 103. That is all for now.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>John Thielking</DIV>
<DIV><BR>--- On <B>Thu, 8/16/12, Brian Good <I><snug.bug@hotmail.com></I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><BR>From: Brian Good <snug.bug@hotmail.com><BR>Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Ambassador Craig Murray on Assange<BR>To: "sosfbay-discuss@cagreens.org" <sosfbay-discuss@cagreens.org><BR>Date: Thursday, August 16, 2012, 4:54 PM<BR><BR>
<DIV id=yiv2039607882>
<STYLE><!--
#yiv2039607882 .yiv2039607882hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;padding:0px;}
#yiv2039607882 body.yiv2039607882hmmessage
{
font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;}
--></STYLE>
<DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr>Ambassador Craig Murray (former British ambassador to Uzbekistan), blogs (red bold mine):<BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt" size=2 face=Tahoma><A href="http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/08/americas-vassal-acts-decisively-and-illegally/" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/08/americas-vassal-acts-decisively-and-illegally/</A></FONT><BR><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4><A title="Permanent Link to America’s Vassal Acts Decisively and Illegally" href="http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/08/americas-vassal-acts-decisively-and-illegally/" rel=nofollow target=_blank>America’s Vassal Acts Decisively and Illegally</A></FONT><BR><BR>I returned to the UK today to be astonished by private confirmation from within the FCO that the UK <BR><BR>government has indeed decided – after immense pressure from the Obama administration – to enter <BR><BR>the Ecuadorean Embassy and seize Julian
Assange.<BR><BR><BR>This will be, beyond any argument,<B><FONT color=#ff0000> a blatant breach of the Vienna Convention of 1961,</FONT></B> to which <BR><BR>the UK is one of the original parties and which encodes the centuries – arguably millennia – of practice <BR><BR>which have enabled diplomatic relations to function. The Vienna Convention is the most subscribed single<BR>international treaty in the world.<BR><BR><BR>The provisions of the <A href="http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/9_1_1961.pdf" rel=nofollow target=_blank>Vienna Convention</A> on the status of diplomatic premises are expressed in<BR>deliberately absolute terms. There is no modification or qualification elsewhere in the treaty. <BR><BR><BR><BR><B><FONT color=#ff0000><EM>Article 22</EM></FONT></B><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><B><FONT color=#ff0000>1.The premises of the mission shall be inviolable. The agents of the receiving State <BR></FONT></B><BR><B><FONT color=#ff0000>may not enter</FONT><FONT color=#ff0000> </FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>them, except with the consent of the head of the mission.</FONT></B><BR><BR>2.The receiving State is under a special duty to take all appropriate steps to protect the premises<BR>of the mission against any intrusion or damage and to prevent any disturbance of the peace of the<BR>mission or impairment of its dignity.<BR><BR>3.The premises of the mission, their furnishings and other property thereon and the means of<BR>transport of the mission shall be immune from search, requisition, attachment or execution.<BR><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>Not even the Chinese government tried to enter the US Embassy to arrest the Chinese dissident <A href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-17877005" rel=nofollow target=_blank>Chen
<BR></A><BR><A href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-17877005" rel=nofollow target=_blank>Guangchen</A>. Even during the decades of the Cold War, defectors or dissidents were never seized from <BR><BR>each other’s embassies. <EM>Murder in Samarkand</EM> relates in detail my attempts in the British Embassy to <BR><BR>help Uzbek dissidents. This terrible breach of international law will result in British Embassies being <BR><BR>subject to raids and harassment worldwide. <BR><BR><BR><BR>The government’s calculation is that, unlike Ecuador, Britain is a strong enough power to deter such<BR>intrusions. This is yet another symptom of the “might is right” principle in international relations, in the<BR>era of the neo-conservative abandonment of the idea of the rule of international law.<BR><BR><BR>The British Government bases its argument on domestic British legislation. But the<B> <FONT color=#ff0000>domestic legislation </FONT><FONT
color=#ff0000><BR></FONT></B><BR><B><FONT color=#ff0000>of a country cannot counter its obligations in international law, unless it chooses to withdraw <BR></FONT></B><BR><B><FONT color=#ff0000>from </FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>them. </FONT></B>If the government does not wish to follow the obligations imposed on it by the Vienna <BR><BR>Convention, it has the right to resile from it – which would leave British diplomats with no protection worldwide. <BR><BR><BR><BR>I hope to have more information soon on the threats used by the US administration. William Hague <BR><BR>had been supporting the move against the concerted advice of his own officials; Ken Clarke has been <BR><BR>opposing the move against the advice of his. I gather the decision to act has been taken in Number 10. <BR><BR><BR><BR>There appears to have been no input of any kind from the Liberal Democrats. That opens a wider <BR><BR>question – there appears to be no “liberal” impact now
in any question of coalition policy. It is amazing<BR>how government salaries and privileges and ministerial limousines are worth far more than any belief <BR><BR>to these people. I cannot now conceive how I was a member of that party for over thirty years,<BR>deluded into a genuine belief that they had principles.<BR><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV><BR>-----Inline Attachment Follows-----<BR><BR>
<DIV class=yiv2039607882plainMail>_______________________________________________<BR>sosfbay-discuss mailing list<BR><A href="http://us.mc1111.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sosfbay-discuss@cagreens.org" rel=nofollow target=_blank>sosfbay-discuss@cagreens.org</A><BR><A href="http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss</A></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></DIV><BR>-----Inline Attachment Follows-----<BR><BR>
<DIV class=plainMail>_______________________________________________<BR>sosfbay-discuss mailing list<BR><A href="http://us.mc1111.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sosfbay-discuss@cagreens.org" ymailto="mailto:sosfbay-discuss@cagreens.org">sosfbay-discuss@cagreens.org</A><BR><A href="http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss" target=_blank>http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss</A></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></td></tr></table>