today on r t over a week after being granted asylum in ecuador julian a saundra manes and legal limbo will bring you the latest in this case in an exclusive interview with ecuadorian president rafael correa you're only going to see on our t.v. . and there's a hurricane brewing in tampa but i'm not talking about i get sick the are in c. is coming to town while the d.n.c. converge is in north carolina a week later and where there is politics there is protests we'll tell you why some protesters are being deemed an arc yes. it's friday august twenty fourth five pm here in washington d.c. i'm liz wall and you're watching our team. well you start off this hour with the

latest on wiki leaks whistleblower julian assange right now the organization of american states is discussing his case here in washington d.c. the u.k. and remained any diplomatic battle ecuadorian president rafael correa has granted asylum asylum but the u.k. won't allow him say passage to the airport they even threaten to raid the embassy to get a hold of assad has been holed up in the ecuadorian embassy in london since july nineteenth r.t. got a chance to speak to president correct here's a look at that exclusive interview we just wanted to address the request in a very thorough and responsible way will look to the motivations from this the sons of the son and it looked into the charges brought against him in sweden reviewed u.k. law as well as international law and of course we went to a room legislation and then we made a responsible decision just as we promised originally after the olympics specifically because they were taking place in london and not because of fear of

reprisals which we knew might follow them we will always be guided by principles and values not fear what consequences might ecuador face after granting asylum to julian assange normally such a decision shouldn't have any consequences that is if all countries respect international law which clearly says that the state has the right to grant to someone and how many times has sweden granted asylum a lot of people requested asylum in sweden and leave the noun in this country is known for its willingness to give asylum and what consequences could there be but unfortunately in this particular case we see that some countries are displaying their colonial and imperial ambitions their essence interested it turns out that if ignored or granta saw them to someone else it certainly might have consequences much consequence is all we talking about if we're exercising our sovereignty in line with international law. are you afraid of any sanctions that might follow

their is definitely no fear but let's face it some leader might be reprisals which would be terrible if the u.k. for example threats and invades our embassy to arrest the songs but can you imagine how big of a precedent this would set when julian assange his mother came to ecuador did you have a chance to talk to her yes of course christine is a wonderful person isn't she we gave her a warm welcome and it was a pleasure to talk to her deter visit to ecuador influence your decision to grant julian assange asylum in any way. no we didn't all decision was made in accordance with international law and was based on ecuador's traditions of humanism as well as the grounds that mr sanchez presented to support his request for political asylum we met with christine she's a very nice woman but it in no way influenced our decision. mr president it's hard to believe that julian assange had no contact with ecuadorian

officials prior to requesting political asylum because he needed to be certain that they were dorian embassy would ensure his safety did you discuss this option with him before hand. no we didn't i didn't talk to mr sands personally but if i'm not mistaken at some point the situation became suit hands that he said he was thinking about seeking asylum in an embassy haps even in ecuador's embassy was sure he would be allowed to stay when he entered the embassy so i think mr sanchez discussed it with the embassy staff since he i believe entered after hours so they must have been expecting him any person seeking asylum in ecuador as embassies will be safe we will see to their needs but after that we will consider granting them asylum with all due fairness if the person in question is a criminal we will never grant asylum to him in a separate why do you think julian assange strolls ecuador and not another country only mr sands can answer that and the fact he did is the best response to this

smear campaign and of his people who maintain we have a new freedom of speech the man whose freedom of speech personified requested asylum in ecuador it's the best response to organize how long do you think will julian assange should be staying in the embassy in theory indefinitely unless the u.k. goes ahead with its threats to raid our embassy to arrest him as you know the threat is not really formed and the u.k. hasn't revoked it do you think they drill a go as far as that i think it will be pure insanity on the part of the u.k. after doing so any of their embassies could be raided and what will they say then what kind of repercussions would such development have we would immediately sever our diplomatic ties of chords i think it would lead to a backlash in all the latin american countries which i maintain that the u.k. has more to lose after that how would you prevent the same from happening to the u.k. embassies around the world and i assure you the u.k.

has more diplomatic missions than ecuador. if the u.k. doesn't give permission for julian assange to safe passage to aqua door how will he get there in a diplomatic vehicle. which would be impossible if he leaves the embassy he can be arrested by the you can't police i'm not an expert on this but i would think this even if you're in a car with diplomatic license plates you're still at the mercy of the driver and who knows what you will agree to in any case as no one is trying to hide his son from the swedish prosecution which we need guarantees that he would not be extradited to a third country why do you think sweden refused ecuador's proposal to question a sound at the embassy even via skype as has been done before why this is widely accepted legal in practice it has been done many times before that's why the it would or an embassy proposed this to the swedish prosecution we invited them to come to the embassy and question mr sands in person isn't that's what they've been trying to do all along they denied our offer so what are we supposed to think now

percent of the so many countries and organizations have supported at windows decision to grant asylum to a songe including not so and most of the alba nations in what way did they express their backing the support we have enjoyed has been primarily due to britain's diplomatic clumsiness i hope you will excuse my language but i just cannot find another word to put it is the british threatened us with storming our embassy to arrest mr sun this is what has united all the nations in south america and other continents in their desire to stand behind ecuador confronted as it was with such a barbaric prospects such threats around acceptable had they been carried out this would have constituted a violation of one of the fundamental principles of international law. thousand as part of our exclusive interview with ecuadorian president rafael correa and to say that interview in its entirety check out our you tube channel and youtube dot com slash r t well for more i'll be the format battle between the u.k.

and ecuador and the latest in the saga eva golinger author and attorney and author joins us now eva welcome so what are the latest developments between our out of the organization of american states that meeting happening today. well the meeting just concluded actually a little while ago and after a day of deliberation finally there was a resolution that was agreed upon by most of the member states it was no surprise whatsoever they canada and the united states were the only ones that took issue with the resolution of the final when in fact canada said they couldn't support the u.s. in a very arrogant way they said they would permit it or allow the resolution to go through but it would put in their own reserves and their footnotes to it meaning that of course they didn't agree with that. but in any case i mean this was a solid showing their support for ecuador it was clearly

a blow to the united kingdom. to sweden and to the united states as well and also we have to remember that the united states and canada and actually oppose the convening of this meeting in the first place and so they maintain those positions throughout the meeting whereas the rest of latin america and the caribbean were of course welcoming and found it important to talk about and debate this issue that's affecting one of the member states i mean that's the purpose in many cases of these types of multilateral bodies there you know they act in accordance with threats against one of their member states or when some issue that's disturbing regional peace is taking place and so that that's really what went on today and i think again it was a showing of course of the relevance of the organization of american states today as an entity that includes the u.s. and canada and clearly they're at odds with the rest of latin america in the caribbean that can you talk more about that role in a resolution the significance of it and what exactly it proposed. well it's not

really a proposal of anything specifically to resolve the situation i mean it's really a statement of support for ecuador it's a it's a rejection of the threats against ecuador coming out of the british government it's a reiteration of respect for international law of respect for the concept of diplomatic asylum and political asylum respect for the integrity of diplomatic entities embassies consulates cetera and again it's a backing a solid backing of ecuador in this specific case giving a stand to julian assange and and the subsequent threats that they have received from the british government there was an issue earlier in the day where the original statement that had been proposed the original resolution had to be modified because some of the other member states including jamaica were at odds with the powerful language in it and so that language was modified a little bit but in the end i mean it came out to be the same thing in the key and it did show that distinct difference between the positions of the united states in

canada and the rest of latin america the caribbean which is very symbolic. you know the image of an empire the in an old empire a newer empire trying to impose its agenda on a country in the new world and in the latin american nation and latin america standing together to show how in unity they absolutely will not let any other nation as powerful as it may even close their agenda or their will upon the peoples of latin america. does the resolution actually change anything you know we have the u.k. and ecuador in this diplomatic battle right now doesn't do anything to change that situation well i mean it's a solid showing of support and that's important because it's yet another multilateral body we've already had statements and read and meetings of the you know south american nations in a sort of alba which is another organization of latin american states. it's all of

them have also backed up with your call for the british government to retract its threat against ecuador there was another. brief given to the ecuadorian government from england today or earlier today in which they said that they weren't threatening ecuador per se. with their prior memo that had been sent nonetheless they didn't retract their original threat or say that they wouldn't by only ecuador's embassy and to arrest julian asylum so i think what's important is this is another showing of the world i was in the world opinion on england in this specific east and everyone is watching and that there's a majority viewpoint there are opposed to the british government taking any kind of action to violate ecuador sovereignty i think it's very powerful that there been so rapid meetings convened of governments throughout this region and to show such a solid support and backing for ecuador and in their stance against the british

government i mean it may not change anything they can't force the british governments do anything obviously they this won't resolve the situation but it certainly does show that you know there is a majority opposed to the stance that england is taking and so i think that that type of support in public opinion and through foreign governments will aid in trying to find eventually a solution to this standoff between the two countries julian assad his current situation he remain stuck in the ecuadorian embassy in london does it look like hell find a way out of there any time say on it doesn't it looks as though i'll probably remain there for an indefinite time period that's what has been reiterated by their government. unfortunately the british government has also been pretty firm in its stance that it's not going to give say fast without that there's really no way to get him out the ecuadorian president was very clear that they're not going to try to smuggle signs out some way to try to defy british authorities so i'm fortunate looks is is now. he's going to be held up there at the ecuadorian embassy in london

for an indefinite period of time and you know what this have to see after a while that someone's got to back down so either someone's got to back down or he's just an established permanent residency in a very tiny space which doesn't seem as though it would really be accommodating in the long term you know i mean i think that the pressure is very important to continue to try to sort of whittle away. position stubbornness that england has taken in this specific case and also to show you know more more and each time that these types of meetings take place and that the resolutions happen and we see the u.s. position in particular is showing that the united states government is behind all of this and is behind the persecution of the signs and so it's really important that comes out and people understand that governments understand that and that eventually hopefully the british government will back down will have to wait and see and what i ask you right now we see assad in korea there are very close allies assad had had the president on his show here on our team let's say that

relationship sours are he out does his stay at the embassy what are the other options for assad or are there any other options might have to say that i don't know if they would classify them as close allies this early in this case i mean this is a situation where an individual who is being persecuted for political actions and believes as requested asylum but for him from the ecuadorian government ecuador has been very clear president correa has been very clear and they will get was silent to those who deserve it they studied this. very profoundly and came to their conclusion to give asylum nonetheless i mean there are always rules that you have to abide by under political asylum or diplomatic asylum you're not supposed to make political statements and in any way could affect the relations between the country you've been given asylum in and other nations basically you know you're supposed to . to live with that type of interaction with media and things like that at the same

time i mean there is a major issue year which is that ecuador has presidential elections next year and most likely will be a candidate you know has announced his candidacy yet he has a very high rating approval rating in ecuador so most likely he would be reelected but all of those factors would have to be considered of course another president could be elected in his place and maybe they would take the asylum away i mean asylum is no is not a long term binding. issue that you know every government has to respect retract so we have to see what would happen in ecuador what options we decide to have you would have to find asylum with another country and you have to find a way to get into their territory. right well i guess we're going to have to wait and see how it all plays out eva thanks so much for coming on the show that was eva golinger author and attorney thank you also had on our team they are activists

flexing their first amendment rights to the da cast their anarchic s. and troublemakers ahead a preview of the protests expected at the presidential conventions in the way these people are being painted by the media. r t is the state run english speaking russian channel it's kind of like. russia today has an extremely confrontational stance when it comes to us. that first phrase that just burns your eyes right right i mean it's like a derivative of actual pepper it's a food product essentially. much stronger than anything you'd be by a lot of. thousands of times stronger than any kind of debris and they were put you

know. the republican national convention in florida just days away now the city of tampa is bracing itself for a possible her akkad and a storm of protests occupy tampa protesters are descending upon the city they plan to charter and bus loads of people and it looks like the city is taking every possible precaution from clearing hundreds of jail beds to drones patrolling the skies it looks like protesters will remain on close watch to talk more about what occupiers happened store for the r. and c. and d. and c. cap and a stolen blogger for firedoglake joins us now kevin welcome so i want to get your reaction to this very heavy handed security we are seeing over there in tampa.

right it's the standard i think to see this now we have a national security state and the united states that wants to show itself anytime there is what we call a national special security event and it definitely puts a lot of you know imposes on people who want to go out and exercise their free speech or engage in first amendment rights something that civil liberties organizations and lawyers from groups like the national lawyers guild and i hesitate to bring to the public's attention as they go there and watch how police and other security forces handle demonstrations now we also here in our time we cover a lot you know drone and their expansion being use here within the last especially domestically now that they're use they're not as finding as much use abroad and we are we just found out that a drone will patrol the skies and monitor what's going on on the ground over there at the convention what do you think about that. it's definitely troubling of but i

guess in the proliferation of drones right now it is surprising and it definitely is something that citizens of this country should consider i think countries all over the world those people citizens should think about having flying robots in the sky policing dissent it's very troubling and i think that there's groups out there one group of particular. who have been raising this sort of concerns about how police forces in the united states might use this technology and part of how this is being justified as we're hearing a lot of fear is being ramped up surrounding the protests especially in the wake of an f.b.i. or excuse me this is from the department of homeland security i have a piece of that metal here states quote prior to two thousand a r n c anarchistic stream is discussed blockading bridges and skywalks in minneapolis minnesota targeting local corporate headquarters taking over

a radio station and identifying delegate lodging locations and the location of police stations and emergency routes f.b.i. and the h.s. assess with high confidence anarchistic stream s. will target similar infrastructure in tampa and charlotte with potentially significant impacts on public safety and transportation and after that memo was released the mainstream media reacted here is here's how they cover this. tampa police and federal authorities are planning for the worst including from around the anarchist groups may try to disrupt the republican national convention. bolton today especially urging police across the country to watch out for indications that activist marriott might be planning to go to the convention to disrupt. the bolton is titled quote potential for violence or criminal action by anarchist extremists during the two thousand and twelve national political convention the f.b.i.

and department of homeland security warned state and local law enforcement that anarchists are targeting the democratic national convention in charlotte north carolina too and they could even try to use improvised explosive devices. now what do you think about that kevin do you think protestors as a whole are being branded or stereotyped as an archivist by them to even more critical to say that what this bulletin is intended to do is give authorities the cover to go in and preemptively arrest people head of the convention this is something that happened in two thousand and eight with a group called the. committees and i think what you're reading from two thousand and eight has to do with that group and that group is very important for people to understand they were charged with terrorism but they weren't charged because they themselves engaged in any activities during the convention they were being held responsible by authorities because other individuals had engaged in property damage

is very very critical for people to know that when these sort of events are being put on by the political leaders you have individuals who are there as activists that are being held and criminalized because they have talked about doing things such as civil as disobedience the emphasis on the blockading of bridges is very important to think about because you can see if you're a member of a group and you want to get attention for your cause the sort of again you might get from placing yourself on a bridge especially during a high profile event like the republican national convention when you see that groups are not allowed to get so close to where they're holding the convention you can understand why groups who want to go and shut down a bridge and attract and attract media because they can't go where they would like to go and so i think it's important for people to think what this really doesn't

give people the cover and in fact final point i'll make here is that the authorities do not consider anarchists to be legitimate protesters actually have said that publicly i wrote about this is that they want to separate the anarchists out from the protesters so that's something that there's undercover teams out there right now doing that how do i make that distinction. it's pretty arbitrary i mean it has to do with the things that they're hearing people say and also have to do with what their informants are ample traders are feeding back to them and from what i've been able to tell in researching you know there are individuals that have been tracked from the looks like occupy wall street in new york city followed down to the tampa area and then i would not be surprised if tomorrow or sunday there was a raid ahead of the convention because if you look at the bulletin one of the ways to mitigate a threat is to arrest people before the convention so the very known tactic and

there isn't much public opposition for the most part citizens in this country are ok with getting people off the streets and not giving them the right to protest in order to ensure that violence does not occur or all right well we're seeing authorities take action even before the convention kicks off kevin what are your predictions for how this is all going to play out in the coming days and the coming week. but i would look to prior events i would look to. quickly with the r n c in two thousand and eight there were mass arrests during sun prior to the convention you had police that were going through and secretly photographing activists. doing really snooping on people and then recently with the nato summit in chicago what was being done there stopping and searching people on the basis of how they look going after live streamers and detaining them in gunpoint and shorting people's homes i spoke to see

a lot of security swarming around centers whether activists that are gathering and i think especially with the with the tropical storm or hurricane that would be coming that's just going to make things all the more work i think that actually in effect will turn the security state there into a much more repressive and see and not willing to take chances because the last thing you want is a disaster and a terrorist threat that's the psychology that we promote right when we have a correspondent that is making her way over there shortly to keep a close eye on how it does all play out kevin appreciate you coming on the show that was coming to sell a blogger for firedoglake. well as i mentioned both the d.n.c. and our n.c.r. right around the corner back in the day conventions were meant to decide the party candidate and announce a v.p. pick today many contend it's more about party pageantry than real politics so are the party conventions even necessary anymore larry harkness of the resident dot net

took to the streets of the big apple to take america's political pulse. in the us republicans and democrats are about to hold their convention to kick off the presidential election season so what are these conventions even do this week let's talk about that you roll your eyes i say convention not into that stuff why are you into a month of politics they're all crooks yeah but we have to choose right or crooks what are the convention duty think what do they do they waste a lot of money. but they do good for media purposes because they could create a little hype around saying condit so yes i think i do too so we really need more hype. in today's world because kind of politics has become like showpiece he says and i have seen the kind of the purpose of the convention i would assume is to make people more interested and give them more information about their candidates so

they can vote for them you need more information i think people already make up their minds without too much information as it is and that's what the problems do you spend a ton of money on it just by sheer do that doug whether an advertising campaign is wrong on the news and then it stops for the soul and then from then on it's business as usual so that we don't do this where you got to start to start and i think that i think you just said the key word business yeah i think there's a lot of money on the table in american politics and that's a bit of a lower is because that would involve the truth of what the if they put money into it than obviously they want something out of a donor i think the whole political process is crazy the amount of money they spend on ads and different things is just ridiculous and it's not truthful the ads are generally. false fake and just you know don't really serve any purpose is a lot of waste of money for the taxpayers you know who do you think is going to get thirty year romney or obama. romney who do you think is going to win a bomb or why. because of mitt romney it doesn't appeal to like either man you don't like either one are you or i think that obama doesn't win with my point of

view i think about all the work a second term ain't correct obama you think he's going to wind up in the dark and he's done a good job because republican side and republican issue when you're going to vote for running. a no choice if that sounds elect then yes yes it is in whatever you choose to do whatever like president you have to choose it's going to make a huge influence on the world not just on the american people but it's actually on the world so we have more responsibility absolutely no matter what the conventions do or don't do the bottom line is the media is going to try to make them seem really really important so grab your popcorn the media circus is just about to start. i'm going to wrap it up for now but check out our youtube channel youtube dot com slash r t america.