• úvod
  • témata
  • události
  • tržiště
  • diskuze
  • nástěnka
  • přihlásit
    registrace
    ztracené heslo?
    KAILASHWikileaks - Assange - Revolution now! + Anonymous + Bradley Manning a Snowden
    SCHWEPZ
    SCHWEPZ --- ---
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    Snowden asks to remain in Russia for three more years | TheHill
    https://thehill.com/homenews/news/493119-snowden-asks-to-stay-in-russia-for-three-more-years
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    ubohy curaci co kradou pliny od deti


    “Assange è il padre dei miei figli: rischia di nuovo la morte" (anche in versione inglese) - Il Fatto Quotidiano
    https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/...nge-e-il-padre-dei-miei-figli-rischia-di-nuovo-la-morte/5771611/

    Emails provide evidence that while UC Global was very interested in the lawyer Renata Avila, in Sarah Harrison, the WikiLeaks’ journalist who flew to Hong Kong to save Snowden, in the Croatian philosopher Srecko Horvat, in the film-makers and journalist Juan and José Passarelli, and in Assange’s lawyers, Baltazar Garzon and Jennifer Robinson, they devoted “special attention” to Stella Morris. “We believe that is a false name”, UC Global’s boss, Davide Morales writes in his emails to the UC Global employees, saying that there were rumors “she had a baby by the host. She is supposedly Uruguayan, but once we came to identify a person related to her (mother) in Catalonia. If necessary I want a person fully dedicated to this activity, so if you have to hire someone to do it, tell me. All this has to be considered top secret so that the diffusion is limited”.

    The baby UC Global was referring to is Gabriel, the firstborn son of Morris and Assange. To try to protect him and avoid revealing his identity, Gabriel was brought to the embassy to visit his father by a common friend. But UC Global was skeptical that the friend was the actual father, as “he is homosexual”.

    The UC Global spying activities against WikiLeaks are now at the center of a criminal investigation by judge José de la Mata of Spain’s High Court (Audiencia Nacional). According to a protected witness, UC Global even planned to steal the baby’s diaper. By gathering his feces and performing a DNA test, they hoped to establish whether the newborn was a secret son fathered by Julian Assange. It was only thanks to the fact that a UC Global employee alerted the mother that the plan collapsed. However, the CIA might already know a lot about the little child: according to a protected witness, the videos, the audio recordings, the pictures and emails gathered at the Ecuadorian embassy by UC Global were shared with US intelligence.
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    if Julian Assange is extradited, it is the end of the rule of law in the West as we have built it for nearly a century. In the name of the fight against terrorism we are giving up many freedoms because we believe that security is a higher value. We have not understood that we are in fact going to sacrifice freedoms with

    “If Julian Assange is extradited, it's the end of the rule of law in the West” Eva Joly (Interview)
    https://www.pressenza.com/...tradited-its-the-end-of-the-rule-of-law-in-the-west-eva-joly-interview/
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    Spanish firm that spied on Julian Assange tried to find out if he fathered a child at Ecuadorian embassy
    https://english.elpais.com/...ge-tried-to-find-out-if-he-fathered-a-child-at-ecuadorian-embassy.html
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    Julian Assange’s fiancée (and children) revealed for the first time
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F19a8V2fsjU
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    Release Julian Assange, says woman who had two children with him while in embassy | Media | The Guardian
    https://www.theguardian.com/...ian-assange-says-woman-who-had-two-children-with-him-while-in-embassy
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/...xtradition-hearing-ahead-month-amid-coronavirus-pandemic.html'There's



    "There's a long history of adequate access to him even before Covid-19. The government restrictions in these grave times mean we haven't been able to take details from numerous witnesses in this country, in the US, Germany and further afield.

    'It is wholly impossible to inform him of the product of the work we are doing. Staff are in short supply.

    'Although the coronavirus has affected possibilities by video link the problem whether he may be able to hear and see what is going on in court.

    'If there are witnesses being heard by video-link that simply would not be possible. He would not be able to hear and see all that went on in court.

    'That's even assuming his lawyers can be in court and we can all be in the same building. He simply would not have a fair hearing.

    'A telephone hearing is ruled out because he needs to be able to hear and see what is going on and to be seen and heard."
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    Consortium News reports:
    Deepa Govindarajan Driver was one of the five members of the public, along with five journalists, who attended Julian Assange's case management hearing on April 7th, where he was expected to appear via video link.

    Shortly before the proceedings began, a court official announced that Assange would not be introduced because he was unwell. No further details were provided, but another surprise came at the end, when Judge Baraitser announced that there would be no transcript, since the session had not been recorded.

    At this session, the defence requested that restrictions be maintained on reporting the name of Assange's partner, who had submitted a bail application. Baraitser refused, in the interest of "open justice", whereupon Mark Summers QC, barrister for the defence, requested time for a judicial review of that decision. He was granted 48 hours, but finally negotiated four days.

    The defence requested a stay on the proceedings until September, since they had been unable to see and take instruction from their client for some time, and would be for some time to come, due to the Covid19 lockdown. This was also denied.

    Assange Missing from Hearing - Reported "Unwell" by Court official
    https://youtube.com/watch?v=6ccGRIuA5SU


    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    U.S. War Crimes Exposed - John Pilger & WikiLeaks reveal the significance of "Collateral Murder"
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OhMppuy8Xo



    Julian Assange Case Update — Assange not Eligible for Release
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjVWxj0gbiI
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    Edward Snowden Live / CPH:DOX online
    https://youtube.com/watch?v=9we6t2nObbw
    MTO
    MTO --- ---
    Snowden warns government surveillance amid COVID-19 could be long lasting - CNET
    https://www.cnet.com/...s/snowden-warns-government-surveillance-amid-covid-19-could-be-long-lasting/
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    John Shipton: the flames of truth - Julian Assange | DiEM25 TV
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jzIuwmdTHw
    MTO
    MTO --- ---
    SCHWEPZ
    SCHWEPZ --- ---
    Britský soud zamítl propuštění Assange | Svět | Lidovky.cz
    https://www.lidovky.cz/svet/britsky-soud-zamitl-propusteni-assange.A200325_174727_ln_zahranici_ele

    Britský soud ve středu zamítl kauci pro zakladatele portálu WikiLeaks Juliana Assange, který žádal propuštění z vězení kvůli obavám z nákazy koronavirem. Informovala o tom agentura Reuters.

    „Globální pandemie není důvodem pro Assangeovo propuštění,“ prohlásila soudkyně Vanessa Baraitserová, která tak odmítla argumenty Assangeových právníků. Ti argumentovali tím, že jejich klient by se mohl ve vězení nakazit.

    _LEPIK_
    _LEPIK_ --- ---
    Last night Julian Assange called me. Here is what we talked about – Yanis Varoufakis
    https://www.yanisvaroufakis.eu/.../last-night-julian-assange-called-me-here-is-what-we-talked-about/
    MTO
    MTO --- ---
    Nová republika: Německá televize zveřejnila lži, použité k vykonstruování případu proti Assangeovi
    http://www.novarepublika.cz/2020/03/nemecka-televize-zverejnila-lzi-pouzite.html

    Jedna velká německá televizní stanice vysílala rozhovor se zpravodajem OSN pro mučení, z něhož vyplývá, že švédský případ „znásilnění“ proti Julianu Assangeovi byl vymyšlen. Pravda vyšla najevo. Takže ti, kteří nechápali, jak je možné, že tento vydavatel skončil v Londýně ve vězení s maximální ostrahou a s jednosměrným extradičním lístkem k soudu v USA, kde má prožít zbytek života za mřížemi, již mají jasno.

    Jeden z předních německých televizních kanálů (ZDF) odvysílal v hlavním vysílacím čase ve středu večer dvě zprávy o tom, že úřední činitelé ve Švédsku byli konfrontováni s tím, že „vytvořili“ příběh o Assangeovi a jeho násilnictví.
    MTO
    MTO --- ---
    2020 Nobel nominees: Julian Assange, Edward Snowden & Chelsea Manning | TweakTown
    https://www.tweaktown.com/...nobel-nominees-julian-assange-edward-snowden-chelsea-manning/index.html
    SCHWEPZ
    SCHWEPZ --- ---
    Washington Americký federální soudce ve čtvrtek nařídil, aby Chelsea Manningová, dříve analytik americké vojenské tajné služby Bradley Manning, byla po více než roce propuštěna z vězení. Tam byla držena proto, že odmítala vypovídat v kauze WikiLeaks.
    Zdroj: https://www.lidovky.cz/...olika-milionovou-pokutu-ji-vsak-neprominul.A200312_233027_ln_zahranici_ele
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    Your Man in the Public Gallery - Assange Hearing Day 1 - Craig Murray
    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/...ives/2020/02/your-man-in-the-public-gallery-assange-hearing-day-1/

    in the courtroom itself, Julian Assange is confined at the back of the court behind a bulletproof glass screen. He made the point several times during proceedings that this makes it very difficult for him to see and hear the proceedings. The magistrate, Vanessa Baraitser, chose to interpret this with studied dishonesty as a problem caused by the very faint noise of demonstrators outside, as opposed to a problem caused by Assange being locked away from the court in a massive bulletproof glass box.

    Now there is no reason at all for Assange to be in that box, designed to restrain extremely physically violent terrorists. He could sit, as a defendant at a hearing normally would, in the body of the court with his lawyers. But the cowardly and vicious Baraitser has refused repeated and persistent requests from the defence for Assange to be allowed to sit with his lawyers. Baraitser of course is but a puppet, being supervised by Chief Magistrate Lady Arbuthnot, a woman so enmeshed in the defence and security service establishment I can conceive of no way in which her involvement in this case could be more corrupt.

    ...

    Baraitser’s intention is to humiliate Assange, and to instill in the rest of us horror at the vast crushing power of the state. The inexorable strength of the sentencing wing of the nightmarish Belmarsh Prison must be maintained. If you are here, you are guilty.

    It’s the Lubyanka. You may only be a remand prisoner. This may only be a hearing not a trial. You may have no history of violence and not be accused of any violence. You may have three of the country’s most eminent psychiatrists submitting reports of your history of severe clinical depression and warning of suicide. But I, Vanessa Baraitser, am still going to lock you up in a box designed for the most violent of terrorists. To show what we can do to dissidents. And if you can’t then follow court proceedings, all the better.

    ...


    I followed the arguments very clearly every minute of the day, and not a single one of the most important facts and arguments today has been reported anywhere in the mainstream media. That is a bold claim, but I fear it is perfectly true. So I have much work to do to let the world know what actually happened. The mere act of being an honest witness is suddenly extremely important, when the entire media has abandoned that role.

    ...

    Baraitser questioned the prosecution on the veracity of some of these claims. In particular, the claim that newspapers were not in the same position because Assange was charged not with publication, but with “aiding and abetting” Chelsea Manning in getting the material, did not seem consistent with Lewis’ reading of the 1989 Official Secrets Act, which said that merely obtaining and publishing any government secret was an offence. Surely, Baraitser suggested, that meant that newspapers just publishing the Manning leaks would be guilty of an offence?

    This appeared to catch Lewis entirely off guard. The last thing he had expected was any perspicacity from Baraitser, whose job was just to do what he said. Lewis hummed and hawed, put his glasses on and off several times, adjusted his microphone repeatedly and picked up a succession of pieces of paper from his brief, each of which appeared to surprise him by its contents, as he waved them haplessly in the air and said he really should have cited the Shayler case but couldn’t find it. It was liking watching Columbo with none of the charm and without the killer question at the end of the process.

    Suddenly Lewis appeared to come to a decision. Yes, he said much more firmly. The 1989 Official Secrets Act had been introduced by the Thatcher Government after the Ponting Case, specifically to remove the public interest defence and to make unauthorised possession of an official secret a crime of strict liability – meaning no matter how you got it, publishing and even possessing made you guilty. Therefore, under the principle of dual criminality, Assange was liable for extradition whether or not he had aided and abetted Manning. Lewis then went on to add that any journalist and any publication that printed the official secret would therefore also be committing an offence, no matter how they had obtained it, and no matter if it did or did not name informants.

    Lewis had thus just flat out contradicted his entire opening statement to the media stating that they need not worry as the Assange charges could never be applied to them.
    And he did so straight after the adjournment, immediately after his team had handed out copies of the argument he had now just completely contradicted. I cannot think it has often happened in court that a senior lawyer has proven himself so absolutely and so immediately to be an unmitigated and ill-motivated liar. This was undoubtedly the most breathtaking moment in today’s court hearing

    ...

    I cannot find any mention anywhere in the mainstream media that this happened at all. What I can find, everywhere, is the mainstream media reporting, via cut and paste, Lewis’s first part of his statement on why the prosecution of Assange is not a threat to press freedom; but nobody seems to have reported that he totally abandoned his own argument five minutes later. Were the journalists too stupid to understand the exchanges?

    ...

    while the US allegation of harm to informants is widely reported, the defence’s total refutation on the facts and claim that the fabrication of facts amounts to abuse of process is not much reported at all. Fitzgerald finally referred to US prison conditions, the impossibility of a fair trial in the US, and the fact the Trump Administration has stated foreign nationals will not receive First Amendment protections, as reasons that extradition must be barred

    ...

    For the purposes of section 81(a), I next have to deal with the question of how
    this politically motivated prosecution satisfies the test of being directed against
    Julian Assange because of his political opinions. The essence of his political
    opinions which have provoked this prosecution are summarised in the reports
    of Professor Feldstein [tab 18], Professor Rogers [tab 40], Professor Noam
    Chomsky [tab 39] and Professor Kopelman:-
    i. He is a leading proponent of an open society and of freedom of expression.
    ii. He is anti-war and anti-imperialism.
    iii. He is a world-renowned champion of political transparency and of the
    public’s right to access information on issues of importance – issues such
    as political corruption, war crimes, torture and the mistreatment of
    Guantanamo detainees.
    5.4.Those beliefs and those actions inevitably bring him into conflict with powerful
    states including the current US administration, for political reasons. Which
    explains why he has been denounced as a terrorist and why President Trump
    has in the past called for the death penalty.
    5.5.But I should add his revelations are far from confined to the wrongdoings of
    the US. He has exposed surveillance by Russia; and published exposes of Mr
    Assad in Syria; and it is said that WikiLeaks revelations about corruption in
    Tunisia and torture in Egypt were the catalyst for the Arab Spring itself.
    5.6.The US say he is no journalist. But you will see a full record of his work in
    Bundle M. He has been a member of the Australian journalists union since
    2009, he is a member of the NUJ and the European Federation of Journalists.
    He has won numerous media awards including being honoured with the
    highest award for Australian journalists. His work has been recognised by the
    Economist, Amnesty International and the Council of Europe. He is the winner
    of the Martha Gelhorn prize and has been repeatedly nominated for the Nobel
    Peace Prize, including both last year and this year. You can see from the
    materials that he has written books, articles and documentaries. He has had
    articles published in the Guardian, the New York Times, the Washington Post
    and the New Statesman, just to name a few. Some of the very publications for
    which his extradition is being sought have been refereed to and relied upon in
    Courts throughout the world, including the UK Supreme Court and the
    European Court of Human Rights. In short, he has championed the cause of
    transparency and freedom of information throughout the world.
    5.7.Professor Noam Chomsky puts it like this: – ‘in courageously upholding
    political beliefs that most of profess to share he has performed an
    enormous service to all those in the world who treasure the values of
    freedom and democracy and who therefore demand the right to know
    what their elected representatives are doing’ [see tab 39, paragraph 14].
    So Julian Assange’s positive impact on the world is undeniable. The hostility
    it has provoked from the Trump administration is equally undeniable.
    The legal test for ‘political opinions’
    5.8.I am sure you are aware of the legal authorities on this issue: namely whether
    a request is made because of the defendant’s political opinions. A broad
    approach has to be adopted when applying the test. In support of this we rely
    on the case of Re Asliturk [2002] EWHC 2326 (abuse authorities, tab 11, at
    paras 25 – 26) which clearly establishes that such a wide approach should be
    adopted to the concept of political opinions. And that will clearly cover Julian
    Assange’s ideological positions. Moreover, we also rely on cases such as
    Emilia Gomez v SSHD [2000] INLR 549 at tab 43 of the political offence
    authorities bundle. These show that the concept of “political opinions” extends
    to the political opinions imputed to the individual citizen by the state which
    prosecutes him. For that reason the characterisation of Julian Assange and
    WikiLeaks as a “non-state hostile intelligence agency” by Mr Pompeo makes
    clear that he has been targeted for his imputed political opinions. All the
    experts whose reports you have show that Julian Assange has been targeted
    because of the political position imputed to him by the Trump administration –
    as an enemy of America who must be brought down.
    Kliknutím sem můžete změnit nastavení reklam