So just days after 48 year-old John Jones – a man closely associated with Julian Assange – is horribly killed in the London Underground, a man has been caught scaling the wall and window of the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder is being kept.
An online statement from WikiLeaks, early Monday morning, said; ‘… At 2:47am an unknown man scaled the side wall [and the] window of the Ecuadorian embassy in London; fled after being caught by security.’
This incident follows not only the death of John Jones, but a spate of other deaths relating to corruption at the DNC and actual, overt threats of assassination recently made against Mr Assange on account of WikiLeaks activity. All of this – in regard to WikiLeaks, Clinton and the DNC – has already been covered in previous posts and so doesn’t need to be revisited here.
The suspect hasn’t been identified and is reported to have fled when confronted by security guards. Police are reporting to be searching for him, but have described him as a ‘cat burglar’.
That may be true, and this incident may be unrelated to the other things; however, the Ecuadorian embassy seems an odd target for a cat burglar.
What fascinates me is this: if it was a bungled assassination attempt, one wonders what the official story would’ve been had it succeeded?
Would we be told that it was a random, lone nutter? A burglary attempt that just would’ve happened to see Assange being killed? Or, more interestingly, would officials simply have come out and said “yep, we killed him” – given that open calls have already been made to assassinate the WikiLeaks founder?
It is that last option that intrigues me most: because, had this been a successful assassination, it would’ve been extremely difficult – if not impossible – to make it look like anything other than a blatant hit job.
There would’ve been no subtlety to it: so just imagine for a moment that we live in a time where an extra-judicial assassination could be carried out on Ecuadorian soil in London, but for the sake of American ‘national security’.
And with the idea of the assassination having already been carefully put out there by public figures, American security officials could just say ‘yes, we did it’.
That seems like a scary prospect; but at the same time like a mere extension of present drone-strike policy, where people all over the world can be killed at the push of a button, with no formal charges, no trial, and no burden of justification.
On the other hand, a failed attempt – regarded already by so many as an attempted assassination – could ensure the same thing isn’t attempted again any time soon, as it would be way too obvious.
While this incident does look at first like a bungled hit job – possibly even aimed at preventing further leaks that will interfere with Hillary’s presidential bid in November – it almost looks so amateur and so direct that you might almost doubt an assassination attempt would be so poor.
Then again, maybe those who want Assange dead really are that desperate: so desperate that they’re willing to be that obvious.
In February, a UN panel ruled that Mr Assange was being “arbitrarily detained” in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, calling upon the UK and Sweden to end Assange’s deprivation of liberty.
Both UK and Sweden rejected the ruling.
The Ecuadorian embassy has criticized the police for taking two hours to respond to the situation, implying that the police and security services aren’t taking Assange’s protection seriously; and has said the British authorities had failed in uphold the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.