Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
September 07, 2020

U.S. War On Journalism - Assange Fights Extradition In British Court

Today the London show trial over the extradition of Wikileaks editor Julian Assange to the U.S. has begun. U.S. prosecutors claim that Assange's publishing of evidence of U.S. war crimes has violated the U.S. Espionage Act.

Why an Australian publisher who worked from Europe and evidently published truthful evidence of war crimes should by guilty under a political U.S. law is beyond me.

The trial in front of the British court is nominally public. But access to it has been severely restricted:

The public gallery of 80 has been reduced to 9 “due to Covid”. 5 seats are reserved for Julian’s family and friends, and I have one of these today, but not guaranteed beyond that. There are just 4 seats for the general public.

Journalists and NGO’s will be following the hearing online – but only “approved” journalists and NGO’s, selected by the Orwelian Ministry of Justice. I had dinner last night with Assange supporters from a number of registered NGO’s, not one of which had been “approved”. I had applied myself as a representative of Hope Over Fear, and was turned down. It is the same story for those who applied for online access as journalists. Only the officially “approved” will be allowed to watch.

This is supposed to be a public hearing, to which in normal times anybody should be able to walk in off the street into the large public gallery, and anyone with a press card into the press gallery. What is the justification for the political selection of those permitted to watch? An extraordinary online system has been set up, with the state favoured observers given online “rooms” in which only the identified individual will be allowed. Even with approved organisations, it is not the case that an organisation will have a login anyone can use, not even one at a time. Only specifically nominated individuals have to login before proceedings start, and if their connection breaks at any point they will not be readmitted that day.

Some 40 NGOs, including Amnesty International, had been told that they would have remote access to the trial but today the judge revoked that access without giving any reason.

With only a few selected and system conforming reporters allowed to watch the proceedings the public will get a very biased picture of the case and the trial:

Right now every journalist in the world ought to be up in arms, protesting at the abuses Assange is suffering, and has suffered, and the fate he will endure if extradition is approved. They should be protesting on front pages and in TV news shows against the endless and blatant abuses of legal process at Assange’s hearings in the British courts, including the gross conflict of interest of Lady Emma Arbuthnot, the judge overseeing his case.
[...]
Journalists do not need to care about Assange or like him. They have to speak out in protest because approval of his extradition will mark the official death of journalism. It will mean that any journalist in the world who unearths embarrassing truths about the US, who discovers its darkest secrets, will need to keep quiet or risk being jailed for the rest of their lives.

That ought to terrify every journalist. But it has had no such effect.

The vast majority of western journalists, of course, never uncover one significant secret from the centres of power in their entire professional careers – even those ostensibly monitoring those power centres. These journalists repackage press releases and lobby briefings, they tap sources inside government who use them as a conduit to the large audiences they command, and they relay gossip and sniping from inside the corridors of power.

That is the reality of access journalism that constitutes 99 per cent of what we call political news.

The renewed but 'politically correct' reporting about Wikileaks' founder and editor will also see the repeat of a number of false allegations that have been made against Assange.

Caitlin Johnstone has published a handy complete refutation of the 31 most often used smears against Assange. She also has good advice on how to defeat other arguments used against him.

Kevin Gosztola has talked with Barry Pollack, Julian Assange's U.S. lawyer, who outlines the case the U.S. government is making:

The position the U.S. is taking is that they have jurisdiction all over the world and can pursue criminal charges against any journalist anywhere on the planet, whether they're a U.S. citizen or not. But if they're not a U.S. citizen, not only can the U.S. pursue charges against them but that person has no defense under the First Amendment. It remains to be seen whether a U.S. court would accept that position, but that certainly is the position that the government is taking.

In the cases that have been brought under the Espionage Act to date, efforts to build defenses around the First Amendment have been quite unsuccessful. The courts have not [generally allowed or supported defenses] based on the First Amendment. But those are cases where the defendant was a leaker, not a publisher.

This case is unique. The U.S. government has never tried to charge a journalist or a publisher under the Espionage Act.

The defense arguments against the extradition from Britain to the U.S. are as follows:

The defence team, headed by Edward Fitzgerald QC, argue that the extradition proceedings amounts to an abuse of process in three separate but overlapping categories:
  1. The request seeks extradition for what is a classic “political offence”. [...]
  2. The prosecution is being pursued for ulterior political motives and not in good faith. [...]
  3. The request fundamentally misrepresents the facts in order to bring this case within the bounds of an extradition crime; both by misrepresenting that Julian Assange materially assisted Chelsea Manning in accessing national security information; and then by misrepresenting that there was a reckless disclosure of the names of particular individuals. [...]

There are additional arguments why the extradition request should be rejected by the British court. But it is not likely that the court will accept any of them. There is not much doubt about the likely outcome of the trial:

[J]udging from the first week of hearings in February at Woolwich Crown Court, all signs point to a decision already having been made to extradite Assange, and that the next three to four weeks will be simply justice going through the motions to make it appear that the WikiLeaks publisher is getting a fair trial.

After the current round of the extradition hearings it will still take some time until the British court system will come to a final decision:

District Judge Vanessa Baraitser is likely to take weeks or even months to consider her verdict, with the losing side likely to appeal.

It is a shame that first the Swedish and then the British justice system have let themselves become henchmen in a fundamentally unjust prosecution of a journalist who has brought more crimes to light than any other living person.

Posted by b on September 7, 2020 at 15:01 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Sep 8 2020 7:06 utc | 85

The guys who did the "Blue Leaks" have the right idea - hack and release.

Doesn't Trump and company realize this would be far more damaging to US interests then a coordinated vetting and release process? Names, operatives, facilities, methods, etc... everything would be out in the open to view. You think they have a problem now, just wait until nightmare begins when everything is compromised.

Posted by: One Too Many | Sep 8 2020 14:39 utc | 101

Hey, what's Trump tyranny against Iran, China, Venezuela, Palestine and...Assange compared to what's good for Mother Rusiya?!

Next thread...back to licking Trump's boots.

Posted by: Circe | Sep 8 2020 14:45 utc | 102

Laguerre @100: "You've evidently conveniently forgotten what Saddam was like."

I didn't know the guy personally. I do remember what the capitalist mass media said about him, but that was all lies as is the mass media's history when ginning up justifications for war. If they pull that on Macroon then it will work just as well on you as their jingoism against Saddam did.

Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 8 2020 14:56 utc | 103

Laguerre@100

Totally agree with Gruff, I never knew what the guy was like, I only know what proven liars had to say about him.

These proven liars have a track record of, uh, lieing. So, I tend not to believe anything they say.

He was probably like leaders every where throughout history, some people liked him, and some didn't. He almost certainly wasn't the boogeymen man that we were told he was.

An aside, it is amazing to me how people can pick and choose what they believe from GOVT/MSM. On one issue they will say they are complete liars, and on another they will be cited as authorities.

Which is it? They are trustworthy or they are not, can't have it both ways.

Posted by: visak | Sep 8 2020 15:24 utc | 104

The trial itself is such a sham and the judge reminds one of historical judicial criminals such as Jeffries of the Bloody Assizes, Roland Freisler, the Nazi prosecutor, and Andrei Vishinsky, who performed that role for Stalin. As such she herself deserves to be labelled a criminal.

Posted by: exiled off mainstree | Sep 8 2020 15:31 utc | 105

Liberalism forever:

The Stalinist Trial of Julian Assange, by John Pilger

Didn't know Stalin invented and patented the concepts of show trial and kangaroo court.

Posted by: vk | Sep 8 2020 15:44 utc | 106

Liberalism forever:

The Stalinist Trial of Julian Assange, by John Pilger

Didn't know Stalin invented and patented the concepts of show trial and kangaroo court.

Posted by: vk | Sep 8 2020 15:44 utc | 106

Very true, vk. I mean, I disagree with you on a number of issues regarding Stalin, but this ludicrous vilification through the "Sovietization/Stalinization" of every conceivable crime is transparent. And it is sad that people like Pilger fall into this trap as the powers that be will still treat him and those like him with the same contempt they have for all modern western dissidents.

Just for the record, Pilger was among those whose wikipedia page fell within the slanderous edting campaign of "Philip Cross" with the blessings of Jimmy Wales.

Posted by: Constantine | Sep 8 2020 16:13 utc | 107

Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 8 2020 14:56 utc | 103
osted by: visak | Sep 8 2020 15:24 utc | 104

This is the trouble with people on MoA. They're so obsessed with the evils of the American empire, that any other issue is just ignored and thought to be irrelevant, if it is doesn't fit in with the narrative.

If you insist on questioning credentials, I didn't know Saddam personally, but I did meet a number of his associates and ministers. If you weren't recent arrivals (or not, I don't care), you would know that already.

Posted by: Laguerre | Sep 8 2020 16:17 utc | 108

@ Sabine | Sep 8 2020 7:27 utc | 86... tough talk on the internet..... i bet you wouldn't last 5 seconds under the same conditions... i think you are full of shite!

Posted by: james | Sep 8 2020 16:20 utc | 109

Posted by: Circe | Sep 8 2020 13:20 utc | 96
...
"Would Assange have done as much for Manning, having had a taste of prison himself for just a year??? I seriously doubt it! Yes I'll compare the two, damn straight I will! Manning has real guts, risked everything for the truth and went back to prison rather than rat on Assange."

...

Congratulations on another spectacularly feeble non-sequitur, 'Circe'. And let's not even THINK about the Creative Forgetfulness...
Manning was ratted by her Fake Online Friend, Adrian Lamo. What does 'Circe' imagine Assange could have done to prevent, or mitigate that?

Similarly, Julian Assange was ratted by Daniel Domscheit-Berg, inspired by the less-than-lofty desire to publicise his Inside Wikileaks book and thereby recover his investment in Wikileaks when his tenure became problematic.

But full marks for not being even mildly squeamish about denigrating Assange's desire for anonymity whilst concealing your own behind an anonymous handle.
Get well soon.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 8 2020 16:25 utc | 110

Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 8 2020 14:56 utc | 103
Laguerre@108

"This is the trouble with people on MoA. They're so obsessed with the evils of the American empire, that any other issue is just ignored and thought to be irrelevant, if it is doesn't fit in with the narrative."

I dont understand this, it doesnt seem to relate to either of our posts.

"If you insist on questioning credentials, I didn't know Saddam personally, but I did meet a number of his associates and ministers. If you weren't recent arrivals (or not, I don't care), you would know that already."

I didn't question your credentials, nor did Gruff. I kind of do now though. Hard to believe that someone who was rubbing elbows with 'associates and ministers' of heads of state would spend time debating with idiots like me on an obscure website.

Posted by: visak | Sep 8 2020 16:41 utc | 111

"Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 8 2020 14:56 utc | 103"

Oops! That part wasnt supposed to be part of my post.

Posted by: visak | Sep 8 2020 16:42 utc | 112

Laguerre @100: "You've evidently conveniently forgotten what Saddam was like."

I didn’t know Saddam, but I haven’t forgotten either.
He was responsible for a war of empire’s choice that lasted 8 years, and killed a million Iraqis and Iranians. He was the empire’s boy, till he wasn’t. See videos of him with Donald — known unknowns — Rumsfeld in 1982.
What’s not to like?

Posted by: Sakineh Bagoom | Sep 8 2020 16:55 utc | 113

If Corbin were prime minister Assange might be having a fair trial.

Posted by: Edward | Sep 8 2020 17:38 utc | 114

I can't help but endorse Pepe Escobar's treatment of this affair, for Assange is certainly responsible for helping pull the mask from the Outlaw US Empire to expose it for what it is, an effort in which he was certainly helped by a mostly unknown series of people. Bush made the challenge: "Either you're with us or against us;" with the British clearly choosing to continue their own unlawful ways of Empire. If the world were polled, most would likely say they are against the Outlaw US Empire and its NATO lackeys; and as Escobar writes, that's what's really on trial. I'd turn the clock back somewhat and say Assange represents the White Rose with the Outlaw US Empire representing Hitlerian Fascism. For me, the verdict was in long ago--Assange innocent; Outlaw US Empire guilty, and so that shall remain forever-more.

Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 8 2020 17:51 utc | 115

@ JR 74
USA wasn't deterred from Libyan intervention or the proxy war in Syria. And today USA occupies Syria and still remains in Iraq and Afghanistan. So I don't think Assange or Wikileads can be blamed or credited for deterring USA/Empire from any adventurism.

You're wrong, as usual on national security matters. There has been a shift in US policy starting with the 2018 National Defense Strategy.

. . .emergence of great power competition with China and Russia . . . It is increasingly clear that China and Russia want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model—gaining veto authority over other nations’ economic, diplomatic, and security decisions. . .In support of the National Security Strategy, the Department of Defense will be prepared to defend the homeland, remain the preeminent military power in the world, ensure the balances of power remain in our favor, and advance an international order that is most conducive to our security and prosperity. . ..Modernize key capabilities. We cannot expect success fighting tomorrow’s conflicts with yesterday’s weapons or equipment. To address the scope and pace of our competitors’ and adversaries’ ambitions and capabilities, we must invest in modernization of key capabilities through sustained, predictable budgets. . .here

This is a sea-change in US military plans and equipment and we must give Assange and Wilileaks some credit for it, with the release of nearly 400,000 Iraq War documents.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 8 2020 18:11 utc | 116

Not sure why you are surprised about the British legal system is being complicit with the deep state. The deep state's creation was deeply influence by the British. These days their legal system is as much as a joke as ours. What amazes me is the indifference to the Assange's plight from the main stream media. Its almost as if they are all on some alphabet agency's payroll.

Posted by: Old and Grumpy | Sep 8 2020 18:13 utc | 117

Edward | Sep 8 2020 17:38 utc | 114

"If Corbin were prime minister Assange might be having a fair trial."

From what I've seen of Corbyn (and I sincerely hope I've seen the last of him), he'd be politically hands off to a fault.

Unless, that is, he saw fit to intervene in order to defend publicly the judge and how she's running the trial. Like how he bent over backwards to defend pro-war Labor MPs against the anger of the rank-and-file.

Posted by: Russ | Sep 8 2020 18:20 utc | 118

Don Bacon @Sep8 18:11 #116

This is a sea-change in US military plans and equipment and we must give Assange and Wilileaks some credit for it

No.

I addressed the USA/Empire re-focus on Russia and China but you ignored it. Here it is again:

And the Cold War with Russia and China was inevitable when Russia chose to align with China. A "choice" that was really forced upon them because USA/Empire only sought submission from them after the end of the first Cold War in 1991. A point that Kissinger obliquely and succinctly made when he said that nobody foresaw the ability for Russians to absorb pain (the pain inflicted by USA with "economic shock therapy' in the 1990's).

The new Cold Wars (which are really hybrid wars) can be laid at the feet of the Deep State that failed to bring Russia into the West after helping China rise to a point that it could challenge USA/Empire. That was a strategic mistake by the double-down crowd of exceptional asshats.


Wikileaks didn't have anything to do with Russia allying with China. That was a Deep State self-goal.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Sep 8 2020 18:37 utc | 119

Why would Trump think that it is a serious offense for an Australian to reveal classified U.S. military information while not on U.S. soil? What gives the U.S. jurisdiction?

Posted by: lysias | Sep 8 2020 19:13 utc | 120

"Laguerre | Sep 8 2020 16:17 utc | 108"

Are you actually insinuating that the US attacked and destroyed Iraq and murdering Saddam for the benefit of the Iraqui citizens?

Posted by: arby | Sep 8 2020 19:16 utc | 121

"Laguerre | Sep 8 2020 16:17 utc | 108"
Are you actually insinuating that the US attacked and destroyed Iraq and murdering Saddam for the benefit of the Iraqui citizens?
Posted by: arby | Sep 8 2020 19:16 utc | 121

Insinuating?
I thought Laguerre, aka The War, was shouting it from the rooftops.
Excuse my French...

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 8 2020 19:52 utc | 122

@102Hoarsewhisperer

Notice how Trump bootlicker stayed away from my 102 comment like it was kryptonite.

Instead, he makes a nonsensical spin.

I'm saying, if the roles were reversed dum-dum, Assange would have rolled on Manning in a nanosecond had he served time like Manning did knowing what prison is like. Spare me the non-sequiter and anonymous bull excuse to not touch that hypothetical with a ten foot pole, cause you knows I hit the mark.

What about my 102 bootlicker? Crickets, huh? You can't handle the truth!

And then you shed crocodile tears for Assange who Trump is going to drag to prison kicking and screaming. But hey, Trump's your fascist mangod...mango whatever. You have no shame.

So much betrayal and hypocrisy so Russia can keep its Trump insurance...blech👎

Posted by: Circe | Sep 8 2020 20:33 utc | 123

Correction @110 Hoarsewhisperer

Posted by: Circe | Sep 8 2020 20:35 utc | 124

If Corbyn had become prime minister the whole circus would have been eliminated since the release of Assange would have been ordered. Therefore, MI5 and the zionist and yankee imperial power structure ensured that he never became prime minister.

Posted by: exiled off mainstree | Sep 8 2020 20:59 utc | 125

Apologies if this has already been linked and I missed it - it is Craig Murray's full account of yesterday's proceedings. (I have to separate the link to make sure I don't mess up the thread as my computer has a habit of misdirection when I use the HTML tags, sorry.)

Thanks to nakedcapitalism.com for providing the link below. Only five persons were permitted in the courtroom representing the public, the family and friends of Assange. Purportedly because of covid,but not socially distanced for that reason.

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/09/
your-man-in-the-public-gallery-the-assange-hearing-day-6/

Within the text, Craig provides a link to Kevin G's tweets to supplement what he has recorded. I found the last of Kevin G's tweets particularly helpful in explaining the evidence of the first witness at the end of the day. My thanks to both.

Posted by: juliania | Sep 8 2020 21:29 utc | 126

For clarity I should have said that was the Craig Murray full account of the first day of the Old Bailey hearing. The new charges were the subject for most of it,and a request for additional time to consder them was denied by the judge.

Posted by: juliania | Sep 8 2020 21:37 utc | 127

Petrov and Boshirov went to Salisbury to steal the Magna Carta which must have been the plug that held the isle of Britain afloat.I suppose they succeeded and we'll witness in our lifetime the sinking of Albion into the waves they ruled once upon a time...
Ah those Russians ra ra ras Putin

Posted by: willie | Sep 8 2020 22:31 utc | 128

Very Poetic willie.

Posted by: arby | Sep 8 2020 23:29 utc | 129

I reckon we need to give circe a big round of applause for her kind demonstration of the dems revenge machine. The only thing that matters to dems is that Mr Assange did what he has always done when a leak has been verified, he published it. Trouble is this particular leak embarrassed a handful of corrupt dem party apparatchiks, so he must be punished to the death just like the dems did to that party traitor Gene Debs who had the gall to run for prez on repeated occasions, so disrupting the legitimate right of dem politicians to run as a party 'of the left' while implementing rightist policies if elected; by showing them up to be the crooks & liars democrat pols have always been.

Oi! If Mr Assange is such a give up why hasn't he rolled on whoever it was who gave him the Podesta emails? Why hasn't he given up all the contributors who have leaked docs to Wikileaks. Even offering up a handful of the biggest leakers who have chosen to remain anonymous would have Mr Assange out of prison & on the pig's back in an instant, yet this allegedly corrupt (according to the circe bot) individual has steadfastly refused to name names. What is that about pray tell?

The 'crimes' dems allege amount to what? Revealing corrupt antics of dem politicians that is what. Instead of whining it would make more sense to gather info about corrupt rethug pols & give that to WL to publish, wouldn't it?
No! No! No! These types must be taught that embarrassing the dem party is a capital offense, they must be killed so others won't contemplate such treason. How can it be treason if Mr Assange is an Australian? Of course it is treason, Assange is a leftist and any leftist anywhere who institutes real leftist acts is a traitor, otherwise that disease could spread to amerika. Imagine that! the squad (AOC & co's little gang) could have actually gone against Pelosi's instructions and voted against the CARES act, her blatant transfer of trillions of dollars to the already rich while giving poor people nothing. The squad could have held out unless a few billion was invested in a Covid job retention scheme.

We can't have that - next thing you know goldman sachs & Alphabet and all the rest might stop throwing money at Pelosi to pay for dem politicians' family and friends of friends' jobs at worthless greenwashing fronts and DC think tanks. Hundreds of dem 'operatives' would lose their five figure salaries. Unconscionable!

Any person of the left who causes trouble for dems must be punished - severely punished. Of course that is more important than worrying about feeding welfare parasites. The dem party cannot be nearly as successful at pretending to care if they aren't in government, now can they?

Posted by: Debsisdead | Sep 9 2020 1:33 utc | 130

@ JR 119
I addressed the USA/Empire re-focus on Russia and China but you ignored it

The US has given up on initiating regime change wars because they failed, especially in Iraq, thanks in great part to Wikileaks which is why Assange is being persecuted.

the Cold War with Russia and China was inevitable when Russia chose to align with China.

The US has changed their mode of warfare, since regime change didn't work so well, in fact Iran was the winner in now having Iraq as an ally, thanks a lot to Assange. The US security state always needs important enemies so they became the new focus, nothing to do with any Russia-China "alignment."

There's no evidence that you ever read national military news so it's understandable you don't get it right, just repeating national "news" and quoting Kissinger from the 90's. . .trash-talk

Read some Pepe, at least: "[Assange] is being punished not for stealing fire – but for exposing power under the light of truth and provoking the god of Exceptionalism."

Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 9 2020 3:00 utc | 131

@130 Debsisdead

Yes, you made a very convincing argument on corruption in the Dem Party which exists to an even higher degree in the other party and there's no escaping that duopoly, for now.

But in doing so you skirted the issue of how Trump supporters here are contributing to Trump tyranny with their right hand while crying justice for Assange with the Left.

You cannot serve two masters: justice AND tyranny. Very hypocritical.

Oh and the greater good I mention above, and I'll add to it, Americans suffering economic injustice as well, must prevail over what is good only for Russia and Israel.

Posted by: Circe | Sep 9 2020 3:05 utc | 132

Don Bacon @Sep9 3:00 #131

The US has given up on initiating regime change wars because they failed, especially in Iraq, thanks in great part to Wikileaks ...

Once again: I addressed the "regime change wars" in my comment @Sep8 5:00 #74. Now you bring it up as though I had ignored it. Here is the relevant part:

USA wasn't deterred from Libyan intervention or the proxy war in Syria. And today USA occupies Syria and still remains in Iraq and Afghanistan. So I don't think Assange or Wikileads can be blamed or credited for deterring USA/Empire from any adventurism.

... which is why Assange is being persecuted.

Assange is being persecuted for a lot more than Iraq. He hurt CIA directly by releasing Vault 7. Before that he was a pain-in-the-ass that would be dealt with eventually. After that, he was at the top of the target list.

=
The US has changed their mode of warfare, since regime change didn't work so well ...

No. Once again: USA mounted regime-change ops in Libya, Syria, and Ukraine AFTER the Iraq War. So USA wasn't deterred from regime-change ops because of what Wikileaks revealed about Iraq.

And the refocus on great power competition came about after Russia stood up to USA in Syria (2013) and Ukraine (2014). This proved that the Russia-China alliance had teeth. Trump's election (2016) was part of a plan to meet the challenge from Russia and China that was recognized as an urgent concern in 2014.

=
Iran was the winner in now having Iraq as an ally, thanks a lot to Assange.

LMFAO. Please explain how Assange-Manning caused Iran to "win".

=
The US security state always needs important enemies so they became the new focus, nothing to do with any Russia-China "alignment."

LMFAO. So it wasn't Wikileaks that actually caused the change? Just US security state looking for new enemies?

And I doubt that many at moa will by the notion that the Russia-China alliance had nothing to do with USA's posture toward those countries.

=
There's no evidence that you ever read national military news ...

"There's no evidence" LOL.

And just how does my reading or not reading national military news bear on your WRONG-HEADED belief that USA abandoned regime-change wars and refocused on great power competition because of Wikileaks?

<> <> <> <> <> <>

Are you trying to promote a narrative that Wikileaks had a major impact and is no longer needed?

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Sep 9 2020 4:09 utc | 133

Don Bacon @Sep9 3:00 #131

The US has given up on initiating regime change wars because they failed, especially in Iraq, thanks in great part to Wikileaks ...

Once again: I addressed the "regime change wars" in my comment @Sep8 5:00 #74. Now you bring it up as though I had ignored it. Here is the relevant part:

USA wasn't deterred from Libyan intervention or the proxy war in Syria. And today USA occupies Syria and still remains in Iraq and Afghanistan. So I don't think Assange or Wikileads can be blamed or credited for deterring USA/Empire from any adventurism.

... which is why Assange is being persecuted.

Assange is being persecuted for a lot more than Iraq. He hurt CIA directly by releasing Vault 7. Before that he was a pain-in-the-ass that would be dealt with eventually. After that, he was at the top of the target list.

=
The US has changed their mode of warfare, since regime change didn't work so well ...

No. Once again: USA mounted regime-change ops in Libya, Syria, and Ukraine AFTER the Iraq War. So USA wasn't deterred from regime-change ops because of what Wikileaks revealed about Iraq.

And the refocus on great power competition came about after Russia stood up to USA in Syria (2013) and Ukraine (2014). This proved that the Russia-China alliance had teeth. Trump's election (2016) was part of a plan to meet the challenge from Russia and China that was recognized as an urgent concern in 2014.

=
Iran was the winner in now having Iraq as an ally, thanks a lot to Assange.

LMFAO. Please explain how Assange-Manning caused Iran to "win".

=
The US security state always needs important enemies so they became the new focus, nothing to do with any Russia-China "alignment."

LMFAO. So it wasn't Wikileaks that actually caused the change? Just US security state looking for new enemies?

And I doubt that many at moa will by the notion that the Russia-China alliance had nothing to do with USA's posture toward those countries.

=
There's no evidence that you ever read national military news ...

"There's no evidence" LOL.

And just how does my reading or not reading national military news bear on your WRONG-HEADED belief that USA abandoned regime-change wars and refocused on great power competition because of Wikileaks?

<> <> <> <> <> <>

Are you trying to promote a narrative that Wikileaks had a major impact and is no longer needed?

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Sep 9 2020 4:09 utc | 134

This is bad news for independent journalism.

Posted by: jonn | Sep 9 2020 6:03 utc | 135

Why not free Julian Assange in return for the release of Richard Radcliffe In Iran ? Win win

Posted by: Mark2 | Sep 9 2020 7:17 utc | 136

Richard Steven Hack @ 85 thanks for highlighting the point that unless the people enforce the constitution (or in the case of other nations that are governed by nation states) against those who operate the governments there is no need for a constitution.. but unless there is a need for a constitution there is no group of people that will attempt to enforce the rights granted to the governed by the various constitutions.


Humanity needs a way to enforce its rights against government.

Posted by: snake | Sep 9 2020 9:11 utc | 137

I’l take that as a yes then.

Posted by: Mark2 | Sep 9 2020 9:11 utc | 138

Western "justice" system is on trial:
https://southfront.org/assanges-second-day-at-the-old-bailey-torture-drone-strikes-and-journalism/

And would seem our friend is not doing so badly.
This is the role he chose. He is having to finish the work that he started. Like it or no.

Posted by: jared | Sep 9 2020 12:08 utc | 139

"You cannot serve two masters: justice AND tyranny. Very hypocritical."

The pathetic dembot says this while shilling for Biden! People think I am waxing hyperbolic when I point out that Americans are deeply delusional, but how could they make claims like that quoted above without suffering devastating mind-quakes unless they are deluded or on powerful psychoactive pharmaceuticals? How can they advocate tyranny while simultaneously believing they are standing for justice unless these notions are originating from hermetically isolated fragments of their shattered minds?

The destruction of the minds of the American population is the result of mass marketing on an industrial scale that totally eclipses the Manhattan Project and the Apollo Program combined as a monument to modern technology.

Of course, everyone understands that political campaigns are mass marketing as well, right? The Dims are currently doing the hardest of hard sells;"If you don't buy this life insurance now then your children will suffer when you die! I know where they live! And you will die if you don't buy, I just know it! My friend Guaido will make sure of that." Capitalist infotainment is entirely marketing also, with eternal war being one of the products they are trying to sell.

Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 9 2020 12:17 utc | 140

Circe you are delusional. There is no other or more polite way to put it. You used to kind of get my support with the pro-Bernie posts (even though your avatar here is clearly manic or bipolar (I won't make assumptions about your real life)) but good grief. You're actually a DETRIMENT to the cause of people who supported sheepdog Bernie. This Putin stuff....you're insane. I can't even take anything you say at face value anymore and let me say - This comes from a true "pwogwessive" and leftist. You simply must be a caricature designed to destroy all of our credibility. Shameful.

Posted by: _K_C_ | Sep 10 2020 5:27 utc | 141

The term "Btitish Justice is a oxymoron

Posted by: Adrian | Sep 10 2020 11:41 utc | 142

History has clearly shown when the anglo and jew get together you have extreme evil eg Balfour Declaration,hiroshima nuking (truman/oppenheimer), GoT (nixon/kissinger), 911 (bush/satanyahu/ehudbarak),etc. Now we have arbuthnot/baraitsar-lewis, its the SAME SAME.

Posted by: Anon | Sep 13 2020 22:06 utc | 143

« previous page

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Working...