Ecuadorian government grants Wikileaks' Julian Assange diplomatic asylum

By on August 16, 2012, 9:00 AM

During a press conference held by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ricardo Patiño, the Ecuadorian government announced that Julian Assange will receive diplomatic asylum in the South American country. After thoroughly investigating Assange’s claims, Ecuador reportedly verified that the Wikileaks founder has been abandoned by the Australian government, that the legal processes he is going through have seen irregularities, and the countries involved in the case have chosen not to provide the necessary guarantees to avoid extradition to the United States where he could be charged with treason, crime punishable by death.

Ecuador tried to negotiate guarantees for Assange’s well-being with England, Sweden, and the United States but none of these governments responded positively to their requests. The decision was backed citing numerous international conventions and as of right now, it is up to the English government to give Assange safe-conduct to leave the country. That said, there are already talks of a possible raid to the Ecuadorian embassy in London to cease Julian Assange.

Assange is wanted in Sweden for questioning on allegations of raping one woman and sexually molesting another, both of which he has strongly denied. He was due to be extradited to Sweden in nine days after the UK Supreme Court ruled on May 30 that it was lawful and gave the go ahead. Obviously that never happened because Assange found sanctuary in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Assange’s greatest fear is that once in Sweden he will be handed to the United States government.

Update: UK Foreign Minister William Hague has confirmed that Julian Assange will not be allowed safe passage out of the UK. 




User Comments: 52

Got something to say? Post a comment
stupidusernames said:

Excellent news! Though it doesn't really mean much.

All it means is that Ecuador have decided NOT to eject him into the UK authorities. Everything else remains to be seen! *bites fingernails*

Tygerstrike said:

Ok let me get this straight. He's wanted for rape and molestation in Sweden and treason in the US. Why hasn't this man been slammed into jail. Why is he free roaming the streets? I know he fears death from the US for the treason, and well he should. He leaked information that wasnt his to leak. But really, I would be more concerned with the rape and molestation charge then treason. As I understand it, the US hasnt actually put anyone to death for treason in a very very long time. The most he should be concernd with is being tossed into a "club fed" where he may or may not be molested himself.

Guest said:

Tygerstrike, please don't speak. You're lowering the entire IQ of the techspot user-base. Instead, I'd suggest you continue watching Fox news.

TadMSTR TadMSTR said:

Tygerstrike, it's been mentioned, and is highly likely, that the CIA paid a couple of women to lie about what really happened. Hell, one of them bragged on Twitter about it.

Guest said:

You must be one of those brainwashed brownshirts who applaud everything the US government says or maybe even worse as in on Stratfor's payroll. Your comment is so factually wrong and full of bias and hatred that calling it utter bull**it would be the understatement of the year.

Guest said:

GO Ecuador! How comes there is no outrage that those ridiculous allegations by Sweden (having consentual sex without condom = rape) could end up Assange into a US death row? Double standards everywhere!

Staff
Rick Rick, TechSpot Staff, said:

ok let me get this straight. Hes wanted for rape and molestation in sweaden and treason in the US. Why hasnt this man been slammed into jail.

He's innocent until proven guilty. He's been accused, but not convicted, and that is why he is not in jail.

This is splitting hairs, but since he is not a U.S. citizen (might be mistaken), he will *not* be charged with "treason". I'm certain it will be just as serious, but it's hard to commit treason against a country you aren't a part of.

You also seem really certain Assange is guilty on all counts in the worst possible ways. In terms of "treason", People like Bradley Manning are directly responsible for these kinds of leaks. They are the ones that actually *steal* this information and hand it over someone they shouldn't (I.e. Wikileaks). Assange gives those documents a larger, public audience, but he doesn't actually hack servers and *steal* them himself

It is interesting to note that federal prosecutors said they would *not* seek the death penalty for Bradley Manning, by the way.

Exactly *how* illegal publishing these already stolen/leaked documents to a larger audience is remains to be seen -- we need this tested in court -- but some whistleblowers go down in history as "heroic" figures. [link]

Believe it or not, the government does *not* always know what's best, just as leaking info on the Tuskegee experiments and the Pentagon papers have shown us. It's difficult to deny the positive outcomes resulting from certain classified information leaks. It's also difficult to deny the negative effects, as well.

I don't believe we can have an effective democracy if the public is left in the dark about *everything* -- sometimes the nation's dirty laundry needs to be aired. How its done and what constitutes dirty laundry is the real problem here, though.

You may find what Wikileaks does morally objectionable and U.S. courts may also find it illegal, but Assange has taken these ideas and given them a 21st century platform. Let's see what the courts have to say before you try to hang him... of course, I guess that's the problem now -- getting him in court. ;-)

Staff
Julio Franco Julio Franco, TechSpot Editor, said:

As much as the international press will focus the news on Assange and the merits for the asylum, if you knew more about the Ecuadorian government, then it'd be easy to see this has nothing to do with Assange himself, who was lucky (or smart) enough to recur to Ecuadorian's authorities. Simply put, Ecuador's president wanted to be on the global spotlight, he wanted to be the center of attention because he craves for that kind of publicity, regardless if it's for good reasons or not. He's a populist.

Guest said:

First sorry for my bad english.

First time I see comments in favor of wikileaks. Sometimes it is like no one see how ""curious" and coincidence is than the charges about raping happen when they put big info about US and friends dirty stuft (killing betwen those stuft)

It is always comments like, burn you, raphis, stop telling the world about big countries big crimes, we don't want that, you are doom. It is like if there is people working on the internet to make public opinion, or it is because something I don't know?

Also, I would like to say than it is very weird than england even talk about atacking an embacy, I mean, if there were an african genocide in one of those they will ask more nicely, even if they ask. But no, we will simple destroy international diplomacy status quo for the first time and attack because there is a presunt rapis there. Come on!

Guest said:

Free Assange.

Do you know why SWEDEN want him extradited because for him question rape allegations?

Why they cant do it in ENGLAND?

Because only way they can hand to USA.

Guest said:

I'm British, and I've gotta say after the high of the Olympics, this is down to earth with a bump. My gov't is being extremely aggressive about an alleged crime not committed on UK soil, or by a UK subject or to a UK subject. Why ? The gov't won't lift a finger even for innocent UK citizens kidnapped overseas, but they are ever so keen to get Assange to Sweden, even threatening Ecuador in a most appalling way. Sweden hasn't charged him. They are still investigating but refused the offer to come to the UK to investigate. Why ? And then we have the fact that if Assange had printed this stuff, he'd be a journalist, but because it was online, they're calling him all sorts of foul things.

Gov'ts are full of evil people hell bent on keeping secrets about how evil they are. It is the gov't that should be on trial here. Instead the US gov't deflects the argument onto blaming the journalist and treating the whistleblower, Pte Manning, like a terrorist and traitor, and abusing him in such a way they show they are the force of evil in this world. Yes, he may be guilty, and deserves to be put in jail, but abusing him only shows the world the evil in the hearts of those in power.

Good for you Julian.

Benny26 Benny26, TechSpot Paladin, said:

It's going to be interesting what happens next because the UK has already said as soon as he steps outside the embassy he'll be arrested.

I can't see the UK revoking Ecuador's diplomatic license and doing a raid due to the strong questions it will obviously raise regarding other countries and their embassy rights.

Guest said:

The embassy has no car park so they will have to put Assange in a very large diplomatic bag and put that in an embassy car and drive to the Chunnel, and then into France, then Spain, then on a ferry to North Africa ...and ... this was tried before : they tried to fly the refugee out from the UK, and failed.

Or Assange can just stay there, as a very nice prison of sorts, with internet access ;-)

gwailo247, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

None of you have any idea what he does, why he does it, who is paying him to leak stuff, who is paying him to keep stuff hidden. All evidence by people who ACTUALLY know him is that he's an egotistical a-hole who wants to keep all this information to himself, to keep people talking about him, to make money. What are all the millions that go to WL spent on, cause its certainly not to keep servers running. He's making profits off WL and you guys actually give him money for this.

He is not an altruistic person who is doing this for the good of humanity or anything. At best, at best, he is doing this to, what did he say, "take down the smug bastards" or something to that effect.

He wants to be a power broker. Regardless how you all feel about the US gov't, it does not make him a good guy or someone to be admired. He just got lucky because he found one depressed soldier and used him. He let Manning rot in jail, didn't contribute anything to his defense. And Manning made him. Without Manning he'd be nobody.

He doesn't care what people say, just as long as people are talking about him. After he disappeared from the news, he now decides to capitalize on the world's press corps being in the UK, and pulls this stunt. Well after the rumors that a CIA hit squad was going to kill him. And from what Julio says, he seems to have found a willing partner in the quest for headlines.

True whistleblowers do thing to make the world a better place, not get headlines, stash millions in bank accounts and bang some hot lawyer.

Guest said:

It's quite interesting how people get extremely upset over this.

To begin with, Jualian Assange didn't commit any crimes by posting materials online. He wasn't subject to the laws by which citizens of those countries are. Therefore, the idea of charging him with treason sounds pretty outrageous. The bottomline is that the United States doesn't have the right to charge him with anything. Did he post documents that were confidential in nature, yes he did, but he didn't commit the act of stealing them or/and breaking laws to do it. Individuals voluntarily gave this to him, though folks may argue one should know better, he is at no fault.

The incident about alleged rape and sexual assault is just that, alleged. It seems more likely that it's a political motion to get the women to say they were raped and assaulted to prevent him from publishing more documents and as a method of "punishment".

Hopefully, he is able to sneak out of the UK to get to Ecuador safely. Should the UK raid the Ecuadorian embassy, it's a strict declaration of war as you're invading sovereign soil.

Guest said:

I don't think most of the previous posters can read!

Assange is wanted for alleged sex crimes, in Sweden. It has nothing to do with leaks or the USA!

If you want to rant about Wikileaks, why not start a new thread, instead of hijacking this one!

Tygerstrike said:

Really innocent untill proven guilty is a US concept. A normal person with no fame would be in jail reguardless of innocent of not. Im not feeding into any media sensation, im pointing out that normal ppl dont get to apply for asylum. The only reason this guy is free is because of the nature of the crimes commited.

You ppl seem to think that his innocence is a foregone conclusion. MAYBE the CIA did pay someone to say that he raped them. That has to be proven first. EVIDENCE...kinda need it to prove your innocence.

I just point out that EVERYONE else would be in jail at this level of charges. What makes him so special that he gets to apply for asylum, gets asylum, and now will be living the high life.

Darkshadoe Darkshadoe said:

"Really innocent untill proven guilty is a US concept."

Umm..I kinda think this happens like in every court in the world. At least the appearance of the concept anyways.

ramonsterns said:

Please disregard Tygerstrike, he thinks ramming a vehicle into a store is the same as pirating a movie.

Tygerstrike said:

@Ramon

Please understand. I believe that stealing is stealing. Period. There is a right way and a wrong way. Pirating is stealing money. I personally dont care if you believe it to be true or not. It is the Law. There are many Laws I personally disagree with. But just because I dont like them, doesnt give me the right to break them as I choose. As a citizen I have a duty to follow the Law. So does every other citizen out there. What they choose to do is not my concern.

As a retail manager I have had ppl drive their car into my store. I have also been robbed before. So from MY perspective, its all just theft. Be it driving into a store or pirating.

Also Ramon just because someone tries to live their life in a good and HONEST way doesnt give you the right to disregard anything they say.

gwailo247, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

I don't think most of the previous posters can read!

Assange is wanted for alleged sex crimes, in Sweden. It has nothing to do with leaks or the USA!

If you want to rant about Wikileaks, why not start a new thread, instead of hijacking this one!

this has nothing to do with Wikileaks? Hahahaha.

You think Ecuador would give an Australian who had sex with two Swedish women political asylum if it wasn't for Wikileaks?

It all has to do with Wikileaks.

ramonsterns said:

Pirating is stealing money.

Last time we had this chat you failed to prove how piracy is stealing money or how many companies had gone bankrupt because of it.

You don't have an argument, you have a belief supported by some logical fallacy with no evidence behind it.

Staff
Erik Erik said:

Dozens of 'regular' Colombians get asylum in Ecuador every day.

Tygerstrike said:

Ramon...

its not a fallacy. Its a simple truth. Product that previously was only available in a physical format and purchasable in that medium. Now it has been digitized and shared is a lose of revenue. How is that difficult to understand?? For every pirated DIGITAL copy, the company that holds the rights to whatever the product is, is going to lose out on the revenue that the physical copy would have given them.

TJGeezer said:

Ok let me get this straight. He's wanted for rape and molestation in Sweden and treason in the US. Why hasn't this man been slammed into jail. Why is he free roaming the streets? I know he fears death from the US for the treason, and well he should.

Wait - you mean he's a U.S. citizen? If he's not, how can he be accused of treason?

For that matter, has he ever been accused (outside of Sweden, anyway) of doing anything worse than embarrassing diplomats, corporations, noncombatant military pogues and politicians? As I heard it, he was careful never to actually release info with any military strategic or tactical value. To officials and others who got embarrassed, all I can say is, cockroaches hate the light too but you don't kill someone for shining a light on them.

ramonsterns said:

Ramon...

its not a fallacy. Its a simple truth.

How you can go on your self-righteous ramblings and still sleep at night is beyond me.

Either way, UK can't touch Assange without trampling over a dozen international laws. Sadly, the UK is just the US in 20 years, a stinking police state filled with minorities demanding privileges left and right. In the end, forget nuclear wars, the next world war will be won over who has the biggest herd of sheep.

Guest said:

Innocent until proven guilty is a fundamental in English law, and thus has always been part of US law. The French don't have that principle and indeed it is not a universal principle.

Assange may be an arrogant, self-serving ****, but who here would have the balls to take on the US gov't, knowing they are gonna come after you with everything they have, all their dirty bag of tricks, to get revenge ? Look at the cruel abuse heaped on Bradley Manning; it's not punishment for a crime, it's state-sanctioned torture.

Essentially, this whole thing comes down to which you love more, your "freedom" or your "country". You can love both, but which one more than the other ?

For me, I think countries are simply lines drawn on a map several hundred years ago, and most gov'ts are bad in one way or another, so for me, I choose "freedom".

Guest said:

Tygerstrike spews his usually wrong and always stupid rhetoric again.

Anyway, I recommend people who are interested in facts take a look here.

[link]

The big question now is whether the UK is going to compromise it's international diplomatic service by violating Ecuador's international rights and European law. Not only does the case not pass the smell test, but if they really want Assange then the oligarchs in power will have to out themselves to do it. That's the real service the Ecuadorians have provided the international community.

Doctor John Doctor John said:

if they really want Assange then the oligarchs in power will have to out themselves to do it. That's the real service the Ecuadorians have provided the international community

Three things - a) you seem to be completely adrift from reality (no oligarchs in power in UK!), b) "They" don't want Assange, the Swedish judicial do, for criminal offences, and c) if you will spout this nonsense, at least have the courage to sign in!

Zoltan Head said:

Tygerstrike spews his usually wrong and always stupid rhetoric again.

No, he is reflecting the view of sane, moral people. Of course piracy amounts to theft. Of course rhetoric isn't a synonym for "words one disagrees with".

Three things - a) you seem to be completely adrift from reality (no oligarchs in power in UK!), b) "They" don't want Assange, the Swedish judicial do, for criminal offences, and c) if you will spout this nonsense, at least have the courage to sign in!

Seconded. (y)

gwailo247, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

Tygerstrike spews his usually wrong and always stupid rhetoric again.

Anyway, I recommend people who are interested in facts take a look here.

[link]

The big question now is whether the UK is going to compromise it's international diplomatic service by violating Ecuador's international rights and European law. Not only does the case not pass the smell test, but if they really want Assange then the oligarchs in power will have to out themselves to do it. That's the real service the Ecuadorians have provided the international community.

That interview was a good read, thanks for posting it.

One other thing to keep in mind is that he is on bail in the UK. Being in the Ecuadorian embassy and then trying to leave the country is a violation of that bail. Now, whether or not that is a violation of international laws is something to leave for lawyers and diplomats, but from what I've read on a few threads on Reddit, the UK actually has several valid legal ways to detain him.

I thought that detaining him would be illegal too, but the people quoted several lengthy passages of both UK and international law showing the purported legality of these actions. In any case, this should be interesting.

Benny26 Benny26, TechSpot Paladin, said:

The law that the UK can enact to legally grab him is called [link] , which basically gives the UK the right to decide what land is considered 'Diplomatic'.

It was brought in following the killing of a police officer in 1984 (PC Yvonne Fletcher) by a gunman hidden in the Libyan embassy, in which created a siege situation. In the end nobody has ever been brought to trial over it.

Personally I can't see the UK using this law though, the repercussions around the world could be pretty bad.

Guest said:

Perhaps the SAS should swing in through the windows and shoot everyone, it would be rude not to.

gwailo247, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

Personally I can't see the UK using this law though, the repercussions around the world could be pretty bad.

Its very true that there would be repercussions, but I also think that this has to do with the UK's own position. They granted Assange bail and he's basically going to ignore them and thumb his nose at them.

I know that everyone is saying that the US is going to extradite him as soon as he steps foot in Sweden, but whether or not it happens, we'll never know until he actually is in Sweden, and then is extradited. Right now everyone is just using this as a boogeyman. Assange is using it to justify everything he does, and his supporters are using it to justify supporting him.

While the US may feel this need to punish him, if they end up taking him from Sweden, then it will really cause a massive black eye to the governments of the UK, but especially Sweden. The UK may be America's little buddy ever since Churchill proclaimed himself FDR's "ardent lieutenant", but Sweden does not have that reputation in the international community. If they allowed it to happen they would really show themselves to be America's *****.

So if this thing plays out like everyone expects it to, Sweden and the UK will suffer a tremendous loss of respect in the international community. In some ways it probably would be much easier for the US to snatch him out of Ecuador, I'm sure people there are as much if not more amenable to cash based incentivising.

Tygerstrike said:

Since the UK has said they will fight him leaving, does that mean the UK has Bail Agents?

In the US a Bail Agent has a lot more freedom to apprehend their target then even the police do. As most Bail Agents are private companies, does that mean that if the Equadorian govt attempts to remove him from the UK, would private agents be able to apprehend him without causing a international inncident.

gingerbill said:

Innocent until proven guilty is a fundamental in English law, and thus has always been part of US law. The French don't have that principle and indeed it is not a universal principle.

Assange may be an arrogant, self-serving ****, but who here would have the balls to take on the US gov't, knowing they are gonna come after you with everything they have, all their dirty bag of tricks, to get revenge ? Look at the cruel abuse heaped on Bradley Manning; it's not punishment for a crime, it's state-sanctioned torture.

Essentially, this whole thing comes down to which you love more, your "freedom" or your "country". You can love both, but which one more than the other ?

For me, I think countries are simply lines drawn on a map several hundred years ago, and most gov'ts are bad in one way or another, so for me, I choose "freedom".

great post . Anyone who can't see Assange is being stitched up regarding the sexual charges to me is an ***** , it's so blatantly obvious. Always be suspicous of anyone being accused of a crime by a goverment who then suddenly has sexual charges against them , thats the 1st page of the CIA handbook , to be honest I find it insulting they made it so obvious , its like they feel so omnipotent now they arent even trying .

DAOWAce DAOWAce said:

Stay safe, Assange.

gwailo247, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

great post . Anyone who can't see Assange is being stitched up regarding the sexual charges to me is an ***** , it's so blatantly obvious. Always be suspicous of anyone being accused of a crime by a goverment who then suddenly has sexual charges against them , thats the 1st page of the CIA handbook , to be honest I find it insulting they made it so obvious , its like they feel so omnipotent now they arent even trying .

You're acting like they recruited Angelina Jolie and Jessica Alba and threw them at him, and despite his protestations he was unable to resist, and finally fell for this devious plot that took years to plan.

He was staying with one woman, who apparently worked for the CIA (much good those leaks did you Julian) and then started sleeping with another one. At the same time. Boy, that's crazy. Not like a NBA groupie can come up with that one. You'd probably get the girls trying to get back at you even if you aren't some international power broker.

I find it insulting that anyone would fall for something so obvious. Well, anyone without a god complex.

The reality here is that his ego was so out of whack that the possibility that he'd be set up a week after giving the US a black eye did not even cross his mind. "He looked at me". Yeah, that's all it takes to set him up.

Frankly anyone who can't see this man is an ***** is an *****.

Guest said:

gwailo247, if you were as non-sexy as Assange, I'd bet you would have given them the pork swordsman too mate. Does that mean you have a god complex ? or just horny ? I think we get that you don't like him. But it's a shame you can't respect his courage. Would you risk life in a blacked out solitary cell too small to sit down in for your beliefs ?

ramonsterns said:

No, he is reflecting the view of sane, moral people.

Sadly, your definition of sane, moral people is that of naive, ignorant people who can't tell they're being taken advantage of.

gwailo247, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

gwailo247, if you were as non-sexy as Assange, I'd bet you would have given them the pork swordsman too mate. Does that mean you have a god complex ? or just horny ? I think we get that you don't like him. But it's a shame you can't respect his courage. Would you risk life in a blacked out solitary cell too small to sit down in for your beliefs ?

I'll skip the lame ad hominem attack. Project much?

But you illustrate my point nicely. You, and most of the internet, thinks he's doing this because he believes in WL, or in any sort of cause. He's a megalomeniac. He doesn't give a shit about WL, about people. He's just doing this for fame and power and to get laid.

If he really cared about this, he would have gone about it so much differently. Seriously, read what all the former WL people who actually started the site and ran the site, and then left the cause have to say about him. Why would these "nobodies" who are not giving TV interviews left and right saying this?

I'll say it again, he does not give a rat's ass about this cause. That's what makes me not like him. Its just a means to an end for him. If he cared about what he was doing, this information would all be out there already, either in the wild, or in the hands of respectable news organizations worldwide who have a legal and moral obligation to edit out information that would result in harm to people.

Instead he keeps it all to himself, parcels it out in little driblets designed to maximize news coverage for himself. He actually told his staff they would be financially liable for releasing any stuff without his permission. FINANCIALLY LIABLE. So you tell me what his motive is?

1 person liked this | Doctor John Doctor John said:

Sadly, your definition of sane, moral people is that of naive, ignorant people who can't tell they're being taken advantage of.

No, he didn't say that, you must be illiterate.

Zoltan Head said:

No, he didn't say that, you must be illiterate.

Nice one, bud! :-)

Tygerstrike said:

Its all a moot point anyways. Even if the US doesnt get him through Sweden, They will just chopper into Equador and snatch him up that way. And lets face it. No other country out there wants to actually go toe to toe with the US.

So basically The US will eventually get what its govt wants and everyone else will be sitting there stomping their feet and crying foul while Julian ends up in jail or dead.

Lets face it.....No country is going to get into a physical confrontation with America, especially over one person who is esentually a nobody. Hes not royalty, hes not a elected official.

Guest said:

as treason is The crime of betraying one's country, esp. by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government and Assange is an Australian national, America has no right to charge him with it.

Doctor John Doctor John said:

as treason is The crime of betraying one's country, esp. by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government and Assange is an Australian national, America has no right to charge him with it.

So what? The USA (or any part of America) hasn't charged him with treason, where did you pull that from?

Guest said:

Treason can only be applied when you sell out your own country. He IS NOT an American citizen so he can't be charged with treason in the first place. As to the sex charges, true or false, I don't care. If a woman doesn't report a sex crime the same day it happened I don't believe a crime happened and if it did, and it wasn't reported she got what she deserved.

Nirmal Mohan K said:

ASSANGE is a free thinker and he wants to bring out all the crapshit that happens in this f'n world....for the first time I would extend my hand to the ecuadarian govt for providing him asylum....and of the rape and molestation cases its nothing but made up and how many hookers do you want in US or for that matter anywhere in this world to say things against someone for money....so dont tell me has raped or molested anyone...so cheap...

Doctor John Doctor John said:

Treason can only be applied when you sell out your own country. He IS NOT an American citizen so he can't be charged with treason in the first place.

Can someone PLEASE answer my question, who is accusing whom of treason? I'm only aware of some assault allegations in Sweden, who decided to inject the word treason into the debate?

Zoltan Head said:

Treason can only be applied when you sell out your own country. He IS NOT an American citizen so he can't be charged with treason in the first place.

Can someone PLEASE answer my question, who is accusing whom of treason? I'm only aware of some assault allegations in Sweden, who decided to inject the word treason into the debate?

No-one, Doc - it's like when they interview politicians on TV and they answer THEIR question, not the one they were asked! Guys want to bang on about treason, so they pretend someone raised the issue!

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.