Customize

Julian Assange What's next?

Discussion in 'Wikileaks' started by Anonymous, Jun 8, 2012.


  1. Unhinged?
  2. Anonymous Member

    • Dislike Dislike x 1
  3. Enturbulette Member

    Some new info on developments in the Assange case:

    http://my.firedoglake.com/phoenix/2...r-swedish-justice-stefan-lindskog-speaks-out/
    The Assange Affair: Swedish Justice Stefan Lindskog Speaks Out

    Stefan Lindskog is a respected Swedish jurist and lawyer who currently sits on Sweden’s Supreme Court, and who has served as the president of the Swedish Bar Association from 2004 to 2007. For him to weigh in on Bradley Manning, WikiLeaks, and Julian Assange, is as if Ruth Bader Ginsburg of the US Supreme Court were to have offered comments on the case; their professional and intellectual attainments are similarly impressive.

    In the video above (available at the link), filmed on April 3 of this year, Justice Lindskog delivers the keynote lecture for a program and panel discussion called “The Assange Affair”, which was held at the University of Adelaide in Australia. While he makes it clear (around 33 minutes into his talk) that his remarks are informal in nature, the mere fact that he is speaking out at all, much less so strongly criticizing the way the Swedish criminal justice system has handled the case, is quite suggestive. Taken with the fact that in March, prosecutor Marianne Ny quit or was forced out and replaced by another prosecutor, even as Anna Ardin (who Justice Lindskog refers to by name) fired her lawyer, Justice Lindskog’s remarks are yet another indication that the case against Assange may be falling apart. It may well be that the Swedish authorities are seeing if they can make this embarrassing case go away without causing more of a furor.
    As my co-blogger Charles states in his post on this video:
    * Justice believes there are not any formal US charges against Assange.
    * He presents the case from the point of view of the Swedish police report obtained from–if I understand him correctly– leaked Polish [intelligence?] documents (!9:00ff)
    * The leaking of the police report was a crime.
    * The leaking was not prosecuted because of the privilege granted to sources of the press.
    * Assange was defamed in the press.
    * Hypothetically, if the women have told the truth, the case is entirely based on the use of condoms. How legally binding was that conditionality?
    * Would a lie about a condom be charged as a sexual crime? If one lies about having HIV, no. It’s charged as assault.
    * Two courts have held that there’s probable cause for sexual molestation (I believe this is also called “minor rape“).
    * Swedish law forbids extradition for political offenses or if there is a reasonable fear that someone could be punished for political offenses as a consequences.
    * The UK court did not try the merits of the case against Assange.
    * Extradition to US: extradition is only possible if Swedish courts would charge the offense.
    * It is debatable whether Swedish law would regard Assange’s leaks as treason or espionage
    * Source privilege is protective only for business secrets, not military secrets.
    * Still, Sweden’s enemies may not be America’s.
    * Justice must not only be done, it must also be seen to be done.
    Speaking of Supreme Courts, here is the Agreed Statement of Facts and Issues from the UK’s Supreme Court in the Assange case. By the way, the condom in question did not contain Assange’s DNA. And Ardin’s new lawyer, Elisabeth Massi Fritz, is the family lawyer for Swedish Prime Minister Frederik Reinfeldt.
    Finally, isn’t it interesting that you who are now reading this are probably only finding about this April lecture via this very blog diary? So strange that something so intimately connected to the cases of Bradley Manning and Julian Assange, who have replaced Jimmy Carter and Al Gore in the US media’s eyes as History’s Greatest Monsters, was never mentioned by the mainstream US press, normally so hungry for the tiniest tidbits about these two.

    NEVER forget that this right-wing Swedish Prime Minister is the very one that extreme right-winger Karl Rove himself is very very chummy with, and who Karl Rove himself helped put in office with his Swedish based pr firm. BTW, Anna Ardin has tweets about being in the offices of this very same firm prior to her meeting Assange. It all stinks to high hell, which is the heaven of these dirty rats. Choke on that Jester.

    Also of note:
    it should be noted that the Swedish Prosecution Authority is stating that Marianne Ny is STILL the lead prosecutor/investigator according to the swedish newspaper Expressen. (Note that Expressen is the direct propaganda arm of the gov't. that initially and illegally smeared Assange even before he had been questioned)
    http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/borgstrom-petas-i-assange-fallet/
    “- Not true. Ingrid has gone into the investigation instead of the Assistant inquiry leader, who has left the agency and went to another post., It is not so dramatic and Marianne Ny is thus still investigator responsible for the case, says Britta von Schoultz, Press Officer of the Authority to Expressen.”

    Assange's mother is not impressed by this Swedish judge apparently:
    Lindskog’s motivation in this speech may have been to remove obstacles to extradition rather than to condemn the prosecution:
    http://thing2thing.com/?p=3555
    http://www.byronnews.com.au/news/christine-assange-answers-questions-to-sold-out-cr/1822432/
    “JULIAN Assange’s mum has told a Byron Bay crowd that claims by a leading Swedish judge visiting Australia that it was unlikely that his country could legally extradite her son to the USA were rubbish. She described the judge’s visit as merely a PR exercise to improve Sweden’s image which had suffered due to the country’s treatment of Julian. ”

    And Finally - Professor: Mismanagement of the Assange case devastating to Sweden’s international reputation
    http://www.newsmill.se/print/49999
    • Like Like x 2
  4. The Wrong Guy Member

    I was busy saving Snowden: Assange | TheTelegraph.com.au

    Julian Assange has taken responsibility for the apparent disintegration of his WikiLeaks Party, saying he over-delegated to his team while busy trying to save the life of US intelligence leaker Edward Snowden.

    Victorian Senate candidate Leslie Cannold quit on Wednesday after a dispute over preferences, claiming the party was failing to live up to its democratic principles.

    Her resignation was followed by other senior figures walking away from the party, including a number of people on its National Council.

    Mr Assange, who is holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, said he had spent the past two months dealing with the Edward Snowden asylum situation.

    "Trying to save the life of a young man," Mr Assange told ABC television on Thursday.

    "So I admit and I accept full responsibility for over-delegating function to the Australian party while I tried to take care of those situations."

    He said the nine-hour time difference made it difficult being party leader and he hadn't been aware of the internal problems until Wednesday morning.

    "I went to sleep last night and during the night this whole kerfuffle broke in Australia," he said. "Leslie didn't speak to me to address any issues or concerns. From my perspective if something is serious you speak to the party leader about it before you speak to the press."

    Continued at www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/breaking-news/i-was-busy-saving-snowden-assange/story-fni0xqi3-1226701920880
    • Like Like x 2
  5. Enturbulette Member

    /\/\/\not Assange's finest moment, to put it charitably.
  6. Anonymous Member

    Interesting article by Assange: http://thestringer.com.au/google-and-the-nsa-whos-holding-the-shit-bag-now/#

    Google and the NSA: Who’s holding the ‘shit-bag’ now?

    by Julian Assange

    It has been revealed today, thanks to Edward Snowden, that Google and other US tech companies received millions of dollars from the NSA for their compliance with the PRISM mass surveillance system.

    So just how close is Google to the US securitocracy? Back in 2011 I had a meeting with Eric Schmidt, the then Chairman of Google, who came out to see me with three other people while I was under house arrest. You might suppose that coming to see me was gesture that he and the other big boys at Google were secretly on our side: that they support what we at WikiLeaks are struggling for: justice, government transparency, and privacy for individuals. But that would be a false supposition. Their agenda was much more complex, and as we found out, was inextricable from that of the US State Department. The full transcript of our meeting is available online through the WikiLeaks website.
    ...

    Jared Cohen was the co-writer of Eric Schmidt’s book, and his role as the bridge between Google and the State Department speaks volumes about how the US securitocracy works. Cohen used to work directly for the State Department and was a close advisor to both Condolezza Rice and Hillary Clinton. But since 2010 he has been Director of Google Ideas, its in-house ‘think/do’ tank.

    Documents published last year by WikiLeaks obtained from the US intelligence contractor Stratfor, show that in 2011 Jared Cohen, then (as he is now) Director of Google Ideas, was off running secret missions to the edge of Iran in Azerbaijan. In these internal emails, Fred Burton, Stratfor’s Vice President for Intelligence and a former senior State Department official, describes Google as follows:

    "Google is getting WH [White House] and State Dept support and air cover. In reality they are doing things the CIA cannot do... [Cohen] is going to get himself kidnapped or killed. Might be the best thing to happen to expose Google’s covert role in foaming up-risings, to be blunt. The US Gov’t can then disavow knowledge and Google is left holding the shit-bag."

    More at the link.

    Also, on Cryptome, in plain text: http://cryptome.org/2013/08/assange-google-nsa.htm
    • Like Like x 2
  7. Anonymous Member

    I'm sure the kerfuffle was obvious. It's not that he is out of touch because of the time zones, he sounds permanently out of touch with human beings not himself.
    Nontheless he is great man who changed the world forever.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Anonymous Member

    A very good piece from Julian Assange, but the URL throws a "Error establishing a database connection" about half of the time. You should post the full text.

    http://thestringer.com.au/google-and-the-nsa-whos-holding-the-shit-bag-now

    The Stringer (Australia), August 24, 2013
    Google and the NSA: Who’s holding the ‘shit-bag’ now?

    by Julian Assange

    It has been revealed today, thanks to Edward Snowden, that Google and other US tech companies received millions of dollars from the NSA for their compliance with the PRISM mass surveillance system.

    So just how close is Google to the US securitocracy? Back in 2011 I had a meeting with Eric Schmidt, the then Chairman of Google, who came out to see me with three other people while I was under house arrest. You might suppose that coming to see me was gesture that he and the other big boys at Google were secretly on our side: that they support what we at WikiLeaks are struggling for: justice, government transparency, and privacy for individuals. But that would be a false supposition. Their agenda was much more complex, and as we found out, was inextricable from that of the US State Department. The full transcript of our meeting is available online through the WikiLeaks website.

    The pretext for their visit was that Schmidt was then researching a new book, a banal tome which has since come out as The New Digital Age. My less than enthusiastic review of this book was published in the New York Times in late May of this year. On the back of that book are a series of pre-publication endorsements: Henry Kissinger, Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Michael Hayden (former head of the CIA and NSA) and Tony Blair. Inside the book Henry Kissinger appears once again, this time given pride of place in the acknowledgements.

    Schmidt’s book is not about communicating with the public. He is worth $6.1 billion and does not need to sell books. Rather, this book is a mechanism by which Google seeks to project itself into Washington. It shows Washington that Google can be its partner, its geopolitical visionary, who will help Washington see further about America’s interests. And by tying itself to the US state, Google thereby cements its own security, at the expense of all competitors.

    Two months after my meeting with Eric Schmidt, WikiLeaks had a legal reason to call Hilary Clinton and to document that we were calling her. It’s interesting that if you call the front desk of the State Department and ask for Hillary Clinton, you can actually get pretty close, and we’ve become quite good at this. Anyone who has seen Doctor Strangelove may remember the fantastic scene when Peter Sellers calls the White House from a payphone on the army base and is put on hold as his call gradually moves through the levels. Well WikiLeaks journalist Sarah Harrison, pretending to be my PA, put through our call to the State Department, and like Peter Sellers we started moving through the levels, and eventually we got up to Hillary Clinton’s senior legal advisor, who said that we would be called back.

    Shortly afterwards another one of our people, WikiLeaks’ ambassador Joseph Farrell, received a call back, not from the State Department, but from Lisa Shields, the then girlfriend of Eric Schmidt, who does not formally work for the US State Department. So let’s reprise this situation: The Chairman of Google’s girlfriend was being used as a back channel for Hillary Clinton. This is illustrative. It shows that at this level of US society, as in other corporate states, it is all musical chairs.

    That visit from Google while I was under house arrest was, as it turns out, an unofficial visit from the State Department. Just consider the people who accompanied Schmidt on that visit: his girlfriend Lisa Shields, Vice President for Communications at the CFR; Scott Malcolmson, former senior State Department advisor; and Jared Cohen, advisor to both Hillary Clinton and Condoleezza Rice, a kind of Generation Y Kissinger figure -- a noisy Quiet American as the author Graham Greene might have put it.

    Google started out as part of Californian graduate student culture around San Francisco’s Bay Area. But as Google grew it encountered the big bad world. It encountered barriers to its expansion in the form of complex political networks and foreign regulations. So it started doing what big bad American companies do, from Coca Cola to Northrop Grumman. It started leaning heavily on the State Department for support, and by doing so it entered into the Washington DC system. A recently released statistic shows that Google now spends even more money than Lockheed Martin on paid lobbyists in Washington.

    Jared Cohen was the co-writer of Eric Schmidt’s book, and his role as the bridge between Google and the State Department speaks volumes about how the US securitocracy works. Cohen used to work directly for the State Department and was a close advisor to both Condolezza Rice and Hillary Clinton. But since 2010 he has been Director of Google Ideas, its in-house ‘think/do’ tank.

    Documents published last year by WikiLeaks obtained from the US intelligence contractor Stratfor, show that in 2011 Jared Cohen, then (as he is now) Director of Google Ideas, was off running secret missions to the edge of Iran in Azerbaijan. In these internal emails, Fred Burton, Stratfor’s Vice President for Intelligence and a former senior State Department official, describes Google as follows:

    "Google is getting WH [White House] and State Dept support and air cover. In reality they are doing things the CIA cannot do... [Cohen] is going to get himself kidnapped or killed. Might be the best thing to happen to expose Google’s covert role in foaming up-risings, to be blunt. The US Gov’t can then disavow knowledge and Google is left holding the shit-bag."

    In further internal communication, Burton subsequently clarifies his sources on Cohen’s activities as Marty Lev, Google’s director of security and safety and ... Eric Schmidt.

    WikiLeaks cables also reveal that previously Cohen, when working for the State Department, was in Afghanistan trying to convince the four major Afghan mobile phone companies to move their antennas onto US military bases. In Lebanon he covertly worked to establish, on behalf of the State Department, an anti-Hezbollah Shia think tank. And in London? He was offering Bollywood film executives funds to insert anti-extremist content into Bollywood films and promising to connect them to related networks in Hollywood. That is the Director of Google Ideas. Cohen is effectively Google’s director of regime change. He is the State Department channeling Silicon Valley.

    That Google was taking NSA money in exchange for handing over people’s data comes as no surprise. When Google encountered the big bad world, Google itself got big and bad.

    END
    ****************************************************************
    Posted in full because the link is dicey.
    • Like Like x 2

  9. https://whyweprotest.net/community/threads/citibank’s-losing-sleep-over-facebook-ads.113002/

    How the hell did you know that?
  10. Ann O'Nymous Member

    • Like Like x 1
  11. Ann O'Nymous Member

  12. Enturbulette Member

    nah luv, its a brand name for a govt psiops cell (IMHO).
  13. Incredulicide Member

    Julian must have seen San Fernando Valley using John Farnham's "You're the voice"

    and decided to do his own version:
  14. piggybacking on awesome thread

  15. The Wrong Guy Member

    • Like Like x 1
  16. The Wrong Guy Member

    Assange vows WikiLeaks Party will live on

    Julian Assange says his WikiLeaks Party will live on despite its poor showing in the election. With about two-thirds of Senate first preferences counted, the party picked up 0.62 per cent of the national vote.

    Its best showing was in Victoria, where Assange was the lead candidate, where it garnered 1.18 per cent of the primary vote. In NSW it picked up 0.8 per cent and in Western Australia 0.71 per cent. But none of these numbers are good enough to get anyone elected.

    "We are the second largest vote count for the new parties after Clive Palmer's party which had a billion bucks behind it," Assange told ABC TV on Sunday. "I think that's a pretty good outcome."

    Continued at www.smh.com.au/queensland/assange-vows-wikileaks-party-will-live-on-20130908-2tdvv.html
    • Like Like x 1
  17. The Wrong Guy Member

    Ecuador may take Assange case to court

    Ecuador says it may turn to the International Court of Justice to resolve an impasse with Britain over Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder holed up since mid-2012 in Quito's London embassy.

    "More than a year has passed, Mr Assange is in our diplomatic mission," Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino said on Tuesday.

    "We are seriously analysing what we have to do in the coming months," he said in an interview aired by Gama television.

    Patino says Ecuador is considering going to the International Court of Justice in The Hague after trying every diplomatic avenue to resolve the conflict.

    Continued at
    http://www.3news.co.nz/Ecuador-may-...court/tabid/417/articleID/316409/Default.aspx
  18. Anonymous Member

  19. A.O.T.F Member

    Press Release: US Release of Mediastan - WikiLeaks’ Fifth Estate Challenger

    MEDIASTAN-ROADMOVIE_200PX.jpg


    TODAY (Thursday 17 October) WikiLeaks and Sixteen Films are proud to announce the US/Canada release of MEDIASTAN – the WikiLeaks road movie.
    The release of MEDIASTAN is timed to challenge the US & Canadian opening on Friday 18th October of THE FIFTH ESTATE – the multi-million dollar Hollywood WikiLeaks film – produced by Dreamworks in collaboration with Disney.

    US and Canadian audiences will be able to watch MEDIASTAN online for free during an exclusive promotion period on Saturday night. Viewers can also rent or buy the download of the film at any other time.
    Audiences in Estonia, Ireland, Lithuania and Portugal will also be able to view the film during these period.
    WATCH MEDIASTAN HERE: http://wikileaks.org/Mediastan
    MEDIASTAN is a vivid, captivating and disconcerting portrayal of the constraints – external and self-imposed – that journalists face, all over the world: from Dushanbe, Tajikistan, to Fifth Avenue, New York City.

    Continued http://wikileaks.org/Press-Release-US-Release-of.html
    • Like Like x 2
  20. Anonymous Member

    • Like Like x 1
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
  21. The Wrong Guy Member

    No sealed indictment against Assange, but it's 'subject to change' | RT

    An investigation into WikiLeaks is still active, a senior law enforcement official told the Washington Post this week, and the anti-secrecy group’s founder, Julian Assange, may soon be eligible for arrest if he enters the United States.

    The remarks from the official — who spoke anonymously and was not identified by the Post — comes more than three years after WikiLeaks began releasing embarrassing US Department of State diplomatic cables pilfered by the soldier now known as Chelsea Manning, an action which prompted the arrest of the documents’ source and the beginning of a grand jury investigation into Assange and his associates.

    But while the nameless official insisted that an investigation is still ongoing, the source added that US prosecutors do not have a sealed indictment against Assange at this time, much to the contrary of earlier media reports.

    "Nothing has occurred so far," the Post’s Sari Horwitz originally quoted the police source as saying. "If Assange came to the US today, he would not be arrested. But I can't predict what's going to happen. He might be in six months."

    Shortly after the Post published their report on Monday, the paper changed the second-half of the quote to remove the source’s assurance that Assange would not be arrested if he enters the US.

    “Nothing has occurred so far,” the excerpt began once again, continuing this time, “But it’s subject to change. I can’t predict what’s going to happen. The investigation is ongoing.”

    Continued here: http://rt.com/usa/assange-indictment-arrest-post-971/
    • Like Like x 1
  22. muldrake Member

    Forget the rest of this bullshit story. Anyone remember offhand what "senior law enforcement official" means in the bogus code journalists use to identify their liars, or as they call them, sources?
  23. Yeah. Anonymous sources are not to be trusted.

    Right?

    Meanwhile, Assange isn't leaving London, much less travelling to the USSA USA.
  24. The Wrong Guy Member

    Julian Assange unlikely to face U.S. charges over publishing classified documents | The Washington Post

    By Sari Horwitz

    The Justice Department has all but concluded it will not bring charges against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange for publishing classified documents because government lawyers said they could not do so without also prosecuting U.S. news organizations and journalists, according to U.S. officials.

    The officials stressed that a formal decision has not been taken, and a grand jury investigating WikiLeaks remains impaneled, but they said there is little possibility of bringing a case against Assange, unless he is implicated in criminal activity other than releasing online top secret military and diplomatic documents.

    The Obama administration has charged government employees and contractors who leak classified information — such as former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden and former Army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning — with violations of the Espionage Act. But officials said that although Assange published classified documents, he did not leak them, something they said significantly affects their legal analysis.

    “The problem the department has always had in investigating Julian Assange is there is no way to prosecute him for publishing information without the same theory being applied to journalists,” said former Justice Department spokesman Matthew Miller. “And if you are not going to prosecute journalists for publishing classified information, which the department is not, then there is no way to prosecute Assange.”

    Justice officials said they looked hard at Assange but realized that they have what they described as a “New York Times problem.” If the Justice Department indicted Assange, it would also have to prosecute the New York Times and other news organizations and writers who published classified material, including The Washington Post and Britain’s the Guardian, according to the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

    WikiLeaks spokesman Kristinn Hrafnsson said last week that the anti-secrecy organization is skeptical “short of an open, official, formal confirmation that the U.S. government is not going to prosecute WikiLeaks.” Justice Department officials said it is unclear whether there will be a formal announcement should the grand jury investigation be formally closed.

    “We have repeatedly asked the Department of Justice to tell us what the status of the investigation was with respect to Mr. Assange,” said Barry J. Pollack, a Washington attorney for Assange. “They have declined to do so. They have not informed us in any way that they are closing the investigation or have made a decision not to bring charges against Mr. Assange. While we would certainly welcome that development, it should not have taken the Department of Justice several years to come to the conclusion that it should not be investigating journalists for publishing truthful information.”

    Continued here:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...27decc-55f1-11e3-8304-caf30787c0a9_story.html
    • Like Like x 1
  25. Anonymous Member

    "While we would certainly welcome that development, it should not have taken the Department of Justice several years to come to the conclusion that it should not be investigating journalists for publishing truthful information.”
    • Like Like x 2
  26. DeathHamster Member

    Another story with unnamed "US Officials". Was it the Whitehouse Head Janitor again?

    The US is run by faceless cryptocrats.
    • Like Like x 1
  27. laughingsock Member

  28. The Wrong Guy Member

    WikiLeaks doubts US report on Assange | Sky News Australia

    "Anonymous US officials with obscure motivations and unknown authority do not have a good track record in this matter or in any other," WikiLeaks told AAP in a statement.

    "It remains to be seen whether the claims by these unknown, anonymous officials are more than just an attempt to reduce public support for WikiLeaks."

    http://www.skynews.com.au/world/article.aspx?id=928427
    • Like Like x 1
  29. The Wrong Guy Member

    WikiLeaks Reacts to Anonymous US Officials Claiming Julian Assange Isn’t Likely to Be Prosecuted

    In the face of the US government¹s three-year attack on WikiLeaks, an anonymous Department of Justice official talking to the Washington Post now claims that there is little possibility of prosecuting Julian Assange for publishing, but that a Grand Jury remains empaneled and the situation may change. So, we have a much-hedged statement by someone who cannot be identified claiming that the government may not indict Julian Assange for publishing. This is hardly the assurance that WikiLeaks and Julian Assange need. It is hardly the assurance that others who seek to reveal material that might offend the government need to carry on their activities. The damage to a free press by this heavy-handed, unwarranted and continued investigation into a publisher is severe.

    The anonymous assertion that Julian Assange may not be indicted for publication of classified documents, even if true, only deals with a small part of the grand jury investigation. That investigation has been primarily concerned with trying to prove somehow that Julian Assange and WikiLeaks were involved, not merely in publication, but in a conspiracy with their sources. There is also the question as to the status of the DoJ investigations into WikiLeaks involvement in the Stratfor and Snowden matters.

    For three years WikiLeaks and its publisher and founder Julian Assange have faced an unprecedented and wide-ranging Grand Jury investigation into its publishing and sourcing activities, with claims that somehow these activities might constitute a conspiracy to commit espionage, theft or access violations. That investigation, which has involved paid informers, unlawful interrogations in Europe and subpoenas to WikiLeaks supporters and social media companies, has caused untold damage to the free press. It has chilled other publishers and journalists from publishing articles and documents to which the public ought to have access. It has made many fearful of association, including PayPal, Visa, Bank of America and other financial services companies, who continue to blockade transfers from us, from our supporters and even donations to our political party in Australia. Despite these and many other efforts, the US government has failed to destroy WikiLeaks, which remains a vigorous publishing organization.

    The formal position of the US Department of Justice is that the investigation continues. Rather than caveat riddled claims from anonymous officials with undefined motivations, the government ought to do the right thing: close the investigation and formally and unequivocally tell WikiLeaks that no charges will be brought. Despite our lawyers’ repeated requests, they refuse to do so. Presently, the situation for WikiLeaks and its publisher Julian Assange remains unchanged. Perhaps with such an assurance this dark chapter for freedom of the press can be closed.

    http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/20...-julian-assange-isnt-likely-to-be-prosecuted/
    • Like Like x 1
  30. The Wrong Guy Member

    • Like Like x 1
  31. Anonymous Member

    Was it 3 years ago!!??
  32. Anonymous Member

    I still LOL at "Bob Carr, Australia's Prime Minister"
    • Like Like x 1
  33. The Wrong Guy Member

    The Ecuador Government confirmed its protection to Julian Assange | Pressenza

    Foreign Minister Ricardo Patiño confirmed his country’s protection to Julian Assange, now under diplomatic refuge in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London since 2012. He said so during a Christmas message delivered from Quito.

    In a message addressed to Assange, Patiño told the Australian journalist and wikileaks founder: “you well know that we keep our firm decision of protecting your life and your personal integrity.”

    “It is important for you to know that the people and the Government of Ecuador have the firm intention of offering protection against political persecution coming from one of the main world’s Governments,” Pariño stated.

    The Foreign Minister compared his Government´s decision of granting asylum to Assange, “a symbol of freedom of expression,” to the United States policy of granting protection to Ecuadoreans who fled from their country’s justice, or to Panama, which recently gave asylum to a former Ecuadorean Assembly member linked to a triple assassination case.

    Patiño requested the United Kingdom to give Assange a safe conduct “because by denying it, it is committing a mistake against human rights.”

    Continued here:
    http://www.pressenza.com/2013/12/ecuador-govt-confirmed-protection-julian-assange/
    • Like Like x 1
  34. Anonymous Member

    The WikiLeaks Mole


    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-wikileaks-mole-20140106
  35. Anonymous Member


    Completely legally binding, you fucking idiot.

    Consenting to have sex in a certain way doesn't mean 'I'm your slave now, do whatever you want to me'.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11946652

    • Like Like x 1
  36. Enturbulette Member

    Let the record show that your outburst was directed towards some blogger named Charles.

  37. What total fucking horseshit.

    An incredibly thoughtful and intelligent man.A man whose conduct has always been exemplary around the fairer sex.As a child, and as a teenager. He has always treated women with the greatest respect. A man who suddenly goes troppo,and allegedly sexually assaults two ladies. A man with no prior history of violence against women. EVER!

    He's been stitched up. And it's plainly fucking obvious.



    Fuck you and fuck off.You're the fucking idiot!.And FUCK THE BBC. They're nothing more than the UK government's mouthpiece.
  38. Anonymous Member


    It is so noted.



    No.

    I was commenting on the basis of "hypothetically, if the women have told the truth" (see the quote I was replying to).

    If there's something wrong with my analysis then pointing that out would be more effective than swearing about it.

    Consent for one sex act clearly does not give consent for all sex acts.



    With some really serious social dysfunctions.

    I agree it looks like he might have been, but that's for a court to decide. You're not judge and jury.




    They can probably be relied upon to quote the prosecution charges accurately.
    • Like Like x 1
  39. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...mails-claiming-Julian-Assange-was-framed.html


    Internal GCHQ emails obtained by Mr Assange, who has been holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London since seeking refuge there last June against extradition to Sweden, showed staff saying they thought the charges were “definitely a fit-up”.

    Mr Assange obtained the emails by requesting the material under the Data Protection Act, and GCHQ has asked staff to behave more professionally after the Wikileaks founder, who has been ordered to stand trial in Sweden over the sexual assault allegations, revealed the contents.


    One email sent in September 2012 by a GCHQ officer to a colleague, and which refers to the publication of more than 250,000 US diplomatic cables by WikiLeaks, says: "They are trying to arrest him on suspicion of XYZ... It is definitely a fit-up... Their timings are too convenient right after Cablegate".

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins