Context and the Assange case.

[hifiguy]

I have been around DU for 10+ years and seldom have I seen more nonsense, twaddle and utter foolishness spouted about any topic than Julian Assange.

A few points here in an attempt to get this discussion back in the realm of sanity

First, the entire Assange case is about two interrelated issues, and two only: Whistleblowing and international espionage. Nothing else is of any relevance to a global understanding of this case. NOTHING. Not one thing about this case is about any person save Julian Assange.

The revelations by Assange and Wikileaks embarrassed, humiliated, and pissed off a lot of extremely powerful people in governments throughout the Western world. They brought to light things no government wants the masses to have any awareness of. Therefore Assange is highly dangerous to them. These powerful people tend to be egonamiacal, paranoid, and exceedingly vengeful; their world is not one of sunny openness, harmony and duckies and bunnies; it is about bare-knuckled power contests for the highest imaginabie stakes.. They do not tolerate having their carefully concealed power games being dragged into the light of day and people who complicate their plans are generally terminated with extreme prejudice. As such, it is beyond question that intelligence agencies across Europe have been pressured by the American CIA and the British MI6 to assist in taking down Assange, and if possible Wikileaks, using any and all available means be they fair or foul, and when intelligence agencies are involved in espionage cases of this sort, "foul" is Option Number One. This would logically include the Swedish intelligence agencies.

Many here seem to be woefully naive or willfully ignorant about what national and international intelligence do every day. There is no excuse for this. What the FBI and later the CIA have done to dissident Americans in America - including unionization movements in the 1930s, the anti-nuclear weapons movement of the 1950s, the Civil Rights movement, including MLK and all of its other top leaders, virtually all anti-Vietnam War organizations, the resistance to Raygun's covert war in Central America, those opposed to the Iraq War, and Occupy, to name but a few.

This is what intelligence agencies, foreign and domestic, DO - protect those who possess and wield institutional power by spying on, monkeywrenching, ratfucking, infiltration and installing agents provocateur and every other dirty trick against those who dissent and/or pose some presumed and often entirely imaginary, threat. It is the very reason for and justifiction of their existence. It is why they ARE.

And how do these organizations do their work? The first critical thing is to try and destroy the credibility of dissenters. For decades,beginning in the era of the Palmer Raids, this was done by smearing dissenters as Communists, left-wingers, fellow travelers, etc. The available history detailing this would fill a good-sized library. No sane person doubts that this happened. Circulating damaging, almost always false, information to try and discredit 'persons of interest' who present some sort of perceived threat to institutional or governmental power is a tactic as old as the first human state.

Likewise, if simple smears prove ineffective, setting traps for dissidents is another time honor. Attempting to catch someone in a compromising situation by way of a "sting" or "honeytrap" is, again as old as time. The information can be used to then blackmail or silence the individual who fell into the trap. It is monumentally clear to any thinking person that this is what was done to Assange.

And smearing people with false information or setting up traps are the most elementary bits of tradecraft for any spy organization. You do not get out of spooks' kindergarten, much less become a field operative, unless you know how to do these things in your sleep. This kind of standard operational ratfucking is child's play compared to the big, complicated operations inelligence agencies regularly engage in,and is the meat and potatatoes of their trade.

So how does this apply here? Very simply.

Swedish intelligence is leaned on by MI6 or the CIA to do something about Assange - preferably something that would result in his arrest, after which he would disappear or die after secretly being subjected to preliminaries that might even make Dick Cheney blanch. How to do, how to do? Find some bait for a trap. Bribe/pay or pressure/threaten (with blackmail or other negative consequences) a couple of women to pursue Assange and let nature take its course. Then have the woman or women file completely phony rape accusations against Assange, with all the administrative detail work tended to by the spooks. Elementary tradecraft, and anyone who believes that this is not possible or in fact likely is a useful idiot at best. Arrest Assange for rape, hold a rigged show trial, convict him, and leave him to the tender mercies of the torturers before disposing of him and announcing to the public that he died in prison of unknown or indeterminate causes. Again, this is what spies do for a living. Eecuting these kinds of actions like is why there ARE spies in the first place.

But Assange smelled the rat behind the curtain and flipped the tables on them. And the useful idiots swallow the official story of the intelligence agencies hook, line and sinker.

This isn't James Bond level spycraft. It's blunt, crude, simple and effective, particularly when all the liars and agencies are swearing to the same story. Its purpose is to eliminate high-profile dissenters by any means possible, and that means by any means. This kind of thing is the woof and warp of what spooks around the world do each and every day and have been doing since before the Pyramids were built and in every part of the world. It's as common as the air around us. It has been done to dissidents in our own country. Shit, just read Octafish's impeccably researched posts about intelligence agencies, the Permanent Government and the "men behind the curtain."

And if you cannot see the logic of this argument, the overwhelming probability that it is true, and how intelligence agencies work in the real world, there is, simply put, no hope for you. You are hopelessly and irredeemably blind and deaf to the nature of reality and your words are worthless.

[AikidoSoul]

283. Read the Swedish Judicial Authority's "Findings of facts and reasons" for insight into how Assange

Last edited Fri Aug 21, 2015, 12:03 AM - Edit history (1)

was grossly mistreated to such a degree that in 2014 FIFTY NINE international organizations "Call Upon UN to Remedy Human Rights Violations in Pre-Charge Detention of Wikileaks Publisher Julian Assange

"

Link to the demand by FIFTY NINE international organizations regarding human rights violations committed upon the person of Julian Assange - https://wikileaks.org/59-International-Organizations.html

The FIFTY NINE organizations standing with Assange stated in part:

"The entire international community has witnessed the opportunistic manipulation of the accusations against Mr. Assange, in an attempt to destroy his reputation and to prevent his freedom and his ability to act politically. It is obvious that this unprecedented situation has not come about as a result of the alleged acts committed in Sweden, but rather due to the clear political interference by powerful interests in response to Mr. Assange’s journalistic and political activities. This situation has turned Julian Assange into a political prisoner, who is effectively condemned to house arrest without any charges having been brought against him, without being able to exercise his right to due process."

If anyone on DU wants to get a really honest handle on the process used against Assange, I suggest you go to this official Swedish legal document called the Swedish Judicial Authority's "Findings of facts and reasons". Savvy DUers will see right through the crap loaded on top of Assange.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110224-Britain-Ruling-Assange-Extradition-to-Sweden.pdf

The "Findings of facts and reasons" document is authored by: Howard Riddle Senior District Judge (Chief Magistrate) Appropriate Judge. (PLEASE NOTE, ALTHOUGH SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE RIDDLE SAYS WITHIN THE "FINDINGS OF FACTS AND REASONS" THAT HE IS UNAWARE OF AN EXTRADITION TREATY WITH THE UNITED STATES, ONE HAS IN FACT EXISTED SINCE 1961 -- Here is a link to that treaty:

https://internationalextraditionblog.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/us-sweden-extradition-treaty-14-ust-1845.pdf

[AikidoSoul]

286. OMG!!!! CARL ROVE IS ADVISOR TO SWEDISH GOV RE PROSECUTION OF JULIAN ASSANGE!!!!!!!

http://markcrispinmiller.com/2011/02/eight-big-problems-with-the-case-against-assange-must-read-by-naomi-wolf/

Eight BIG PROBLEMS with the “case” against Assange (MUST-READ by Naomi Wolf)

Something Rotten in the State of Sweden: 8 Big Problems with the ‘Case’ Against Assange
by Naomi Wolf

Exclusive to News from Underground

Now that Andrew Kreig, of the Justice Integrity Project, has confirmed Karl Rove’s role as an advisor to the Swedish government in its prosecution of Julian Assange on sexual misconduct charges, it is important that we note the many glaring aberrations in the handling of Assange’s case by the authorities in Sweden.

Dr. Brian Palmer, a social anthropologist at Uppsala University, explained on Kreig’s radio show last month that Karl Rove has been working directly as an advisor to the governing Moderate Party. Kreig also reported, in Connecticut Watchdog, that the Assange accusers’ lawyer is a partner in the law firm Borgström and Bodström, whose other name partner, Thomas Bodström, is a former Swedish Minister of Justice. In that office, Bodström helped approve a 2001 CIA rendition request to Sweden, to allow the CIA to fly two asylum-seekers from Sweden to Egypt, where they were tortured. This background compels us to review the case against Assange with extreme care.

Based on my 23 years of reporting on global rape law, and my five years of supporting women at rape crisis centers and battered women’s shelters, I can say with certainty that this case is not being treated as a normal rape or sexual assault case. New details from the Swedish police make this quite clear. Their transcript of the complaints against Assange is strikingly unlike the dozens of such transcripts that I have read throughout the years as an advocate for victims of sex crimes.

Specifically, there are eight ways in which this transcript is unusual:

1) Police never pursue complaints in which there is no indication of lack of consent.

SNIP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ronnie624]

303. Thanks.

[AikidoSoul]

314. Sweden Tells the UN that Indefinite Detention Without Charge is Fine

The United Kingdom’s costs for its embassy "siege" against Julian Assange, who has not been charged with an offence, has hit 10 million pounds, Scotland Yard confirmed today.

Meanwhile, damning footage has been released from the United Nations.

Sweden fell under fire at the UN over its decision to insist on the detention of Assange for more than 1,500 days without charge. It aborted its own press conference after pointed questions from journalists, and explicitly stated that it had no problem with indefinite detention without charge, not just for Mr Assange, but as a principle. Most countries place strict limits on detention without charge. In the UK and Australia, and in the US (except for Guantanamo Bay), a matter of hours.

Mr Assange said: "Sweden has imported Guantanamo’s most shameful legal practice - indefinite detention without charge."

On 26 January 2015 Sweden was the subject of the United Nations Human Rights Commission Universal Periodic Review (UPR) at the UN in Geneva. Fifty-nine human rights organisations filed complaints against Sweden’s behaviour in the Assange case as part of the UPR.

https://wikileaks.org/Sweden-Tells-the-UN-that.html

[AikidoSoul]

343. Assange has known since 2011 that a secret indictment was waiting for him in the USA

Last edited Sat Aug 22, 2015, 12:00 PM - Edit history (1)

Thanks to a post by DUer SNOT I found this and a good comment from him at the end of this post from 2012.

Taken from Rolling Stone

"WikiLeaks Stratfor Emails: A Secret Indictment Against Julian Assange?"

On January 26, 2011, Fred Burton, the vice president of Stratfor, a leading private intelligence firm which bills itself as a kind of shadow CIA, sent an excited email to his colleagues. "Text Not for Pub," he wrote. "We" – meaning the U.S. government – "have a sealed indictment on Assange. Pls protect."

The news, if true, was a bombshell. At the time, the Justice Department was ramping up its investigation of Julian Assange, the founder of the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks, which over the past few years has released hundreds of thousands of sensitive government documents. An indictment under the 1917 Espionage Act would be the most serious action taken to date against Assange, possibly paving the way for his extradition to the U.S. (Assange is currently under house arrest in Britain fighting extradition to Sweden on sexual assault charges.)

Burton, a former federal agent with the U.S. Diplomatic Security Services, had reason to trust his information. He often boasted of his stellar government sources ("CIA cronies," he called them in another email), and in his role as a government counter-terror agent he had worked on some of the most high-profile terrorism cases of recent years, including the arrest of the first World Trade Center bomber, Ramzi Yousef. As the VP of Texas-based Stratfor Global Intelligence, a private firm that contracts with corporations and several government agencies, like the Department of Homeland Security, to collect and analyze intelligence on political situations around the world, it was part of his job to keep those contacts alive and share inside information with analysts at the company. (The emails cited in this story – contained in a leak of 5 million internal Stratfor messages – were examined by Rolling Stone in an investigative partnership with Wikileaks.)

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/wikileaks-stratfor-emails-a-secret-indictment-against-assange-20120228

Good quote by "SNOT" found in a June 2012 post where he did an analysis of the situation:

"The fact is, most legal experts agree that there's no way to indict Assange for espionage, since he's not a US citizen (i.e., the US isn't his country to begin with, so he can't betray it. Only way to get him is as a co-conspirator with Manning; but apparently they haven't been able to get Manning to implicate him, despite subjecting him to conditions widely considered to be torture; or else they're keeping the indictment secret, perhaps bec. they know if they reveal it, they would be prevented from extradicting him from any number of countries that refuse to allow extradition if the person could face capital punishment.)"

Aikido Soul: Yep. I would worry that the CIA torturers would force Manning to implicate Assange so he could be boiled alive in Guantanamo. Or just do one of those rendiditon kidnappings and drop him out of a plane."

[AikidoSoul]

425. Comment to SNOT's June 2012 comment about "there's no way to indict Assange for espionage"

It's three years later and Rove and his collaborators are still strategizing about how to snatch Assange. Somewhere in this thread there is a video link where Rove actually says the equivalent of that.

Rove and his allies are people with no conscience whatsoever. You know that and so do most savvy DUers. The Rovians are out for revenge for embarrassing their friends.

Assange just wrote an open letter to French President Francois Hollande, asking for political asylum in France. He was refused. IMHO that is a blow that stinks of fear. Hollande should be grateful that WikiLeaks published how the NSA eavesdropped on the last three French presidents. Maybe Hollande is afraid that he's being spied on as well. Here's the NYT story on the NSA spying on three French presidents:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/24/world/europe/wikileaks-files-said-to-show-nsa-spied-on-french-leaders.html?ref=topics

Here's the NYT story on President Hollande's refusal to grant Assange asylum:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/04/world/europe/french-president-denies-julian-assanges-request-for-protection.html?ref=topics

Assange cannot even go outside to get fresh air because of the Scotland Yard forces surrounding the Ecuadorian embassy. He cannot even go to a hospital, and says that his "health is deteriorating."

[AikidoSoul]

426. Sarah Palin: hunt WikiLeaks founder like al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders

The founder of WikiLeaks should be hunted down just like al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders, according to Sarah Palin at the Republican National Convention.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8171269/Sarah-Palin-hunt-WikiLeaks-founder-like-al-Qaeda-and-Taliban-leaders.html



Writing on her Facebook page on Monday, Mrs Palin questioned why the US authorities were not looking for him in the same way that it had hunted suspected terrorists.

SNIP

Rick Santorum, another prominent conservative, agreed with her, saying: “We haven't gone after this guy, we haven't tried to prosecute him, we haven't gotten our allies to go out and lock this guy up and bring him up on terrorism charges.”

[AikidoSoul]

431. Good works of Assange's WikiLeaks - Links by country

Every country in the world is listed and it is a mind blowing collection.


https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Countries

[Mnemosyne]

2. An excellent OP, hifiguy! Hope it awakens some here, but the propaganda has been strong. nt

[hifiguy]

4. The intelligence agencies and propaganda machines get those billions upon billions

for a reason.

I usually think of the people at DU as being brighter than average despite being regularly disabused of that notion.

This seems so blindingly, unavoidably obvious that only the most narrowly driven ideologists can avoid seeing the tiger in the bathroom.

[Mnemosyne]

179. I see you are getting hammered for your OP.

DU has changed so much over the years. The constant attacks are disturbing.

[hifiguy]

181. I expected to get hammered by those

very people. To give a shit about their opinions I would have to believe they can think straight. The evidence speaks for itself, doesn't it.

The reflective mind asks "what is going on here?" and considers what hypothesis might explain the observed reality. The blinkered dogmatist arrives with an answer in hand, and questions only confuse and complicate what has already been decided. Therefore questions are to be avoided. A very fundy/Republican-like thought process, if you can call it that, at least IMO. Verdict first, trial later. I'd always thought lefties were better than that. Oh, well.....

[librechik]

198. bless your heart, hifiguy

Your post was accurate, well said and unfortunately necessary. I can hardly bring myself to post at DU anymore because of the "hammering" you get if you post anything other than the official MSM story. The younger folks here are woefully uninformed--and resistant to information that goes against their generational indoctrination. Of course this is natural--but quite vexing!

[hifiguy]

199. Thank you.

I enjoy being a bit of a gadfly. DU is a very different place than it was just a few years ago and there is a group of folks who are very vigilant idea police. They behave much like the spooks I described as using smear and deflection tactics.

It would be funnier if it weren't so pathetic.

[librechik]

201. this thread is fabulous for flushing out moles

I already have six old familiar names to put on my ignore list!

(I have heart disease, it's not good for me to implode.)

So no, thank you, hifiguy!

[AikidoSoul]

291. "Sex accusers boasted about their 'conquest' of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange"

Report from the India Times:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Sex-accusers-boasted-about-their-conquest-of-WikiLeaks-founder-Julian-Assange/articleshow/7068149.cms?referral=PM

Anna Ardin: "Condom broke"

Sex accusers boasted about their 'conquest' of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange

TNN | Dec 9, 2010, 12.56AM IST

The two Swedish women who have brought sex charges against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange boasted about their relationship with him days before going to police.

Based on information available on various websites quoting police and court files, and reports in the Swedish media, here's an account of what happened.

The story goes back to August this year, when Assange was in Stockholm to speak at the invitation of Sweden's Social Democratic Party.

The event organizer was 31-year-old Anna Ardin, press secretary of the Brotherhood Movement, which is an adjunct of the Social Democratic Party. Ardin, who has been described as a feminist, leftist and animal rights activist, previously worked at the Uppsala University, handling equality issues for the students' union. (After pressing charges against Assange, she has been called a "CIA agent" on various blogs and Twitter. The internet is abuzz with conspiracy theories on how Assange was framed. Speculation about her ties to CIA is being fuelled by her alleged association with anti-Castro groups funded by the US.)

SNIP

[AikidoSoul]

318. Maybe it's almost over now? "Julian Assange's attorney speaks out as sexual assault case dropped"

http://www.theguardian.com/media/video/2015/aug/13/julian-assange-sexual-assault-case-wikileaks-video

A human rights attorney representing Julian Assange reacts to Thursday’s news that various sexual assault charges against the WikiLeaks founder have been dropped, following the expiration of a five-year time limit. Carey Shenkman says it is ‘unacceptable’ that Assange has been detained for so long without a charge, and questions the motives of Swedish prosecutors.

Source: Ruptly TV -- Thursday 13 August 2015 17.41 EDT

[AikidoSoul]

418. Come back librchik and support hifiguy and those trying to post

threads that tell the truth. Those people are still here.

When we see their posts we should support them, and not allow the HAMMERS to steal and pollute the posts.

It is heart warming that at least Austrailian journalists have supported Assange.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-12-23/journalists-union-shows-support-for-assange/2383428

Journalists' union shows support for Assange

SNIP

"We've been very disappointed in the way his journalism has been characterised," she said.

"We'd like to remind everyone that Julian, like other members of the media alliance, is covered by our code of ethics that covers journalists," she said.

"We're pointing out that we don't believe that Julian Assange has in any way broken the code of ethics, we believe that he's upholding two of its important principles - not to disclose his source, and secondly, to publish in the public interest."

Ms Connor says his situation is extraordinary and he must be supported in the name of free speech.

SNIP

WikiLeaks continues to progressively release 250,000 leaked US diplomatic cables, as promised.

SNIP

"WikiLeaks is simply performing the same function as media organisations have for centuries in facilitating the release of information in the public interest," she said in a statement.

"Mr Assange's rights should be respected just the same as other journalists.

"WikiLeaks has broken no Australian law and as an Australian citizen, Julian Assange should be supported by the Australian Government, not prematurely convicted."

[AikidoSoul]

430. Julian Assange should be awarded Nobel peace prize, suggests Russia

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/09/julian-assange-nobel-peace-prize

Julian Assange should be awarded Nobel peace prize, suggests Russia

Russia urges Assange nomination in calculated dig at the US over WikiLeaks founder's detention

SNIP

Russia's reflexively suspicious leadership appears to have come round to WikiLeaks, having decided that the ongoing torrent of disclosures are ultimately far more damaging and disastrous to America's long-term geopolitical interests than they are to Russia's.

The Kremlin's initial reaction to stories dubbing Russia a corrupt "mafia state" and kleptocracy was, predictably, negative. Last week Medvedev's spokesman dubbed the revelations "not worthy of comment" while Putin raged that a US diplomatic cable comparing him to Batman and Medvedev to Robin was "arrogant" and "unethical". State TV ignored the claims.

Subsequent disclosures, however, that Nato had secretly prepared a plan in case Russia invaded its Baltic neighbours have left the Kremlin smarting. Today Russia's foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said Nato had to explain why it privately considered Russia an enemy while publicly describing it warmly as a "strategic partner" and ally.

SNIP

[AikidoSoul]

401. Hifiguy, in case you ever wondered whether Assange helped the world realize that fascism is upon us

Here a tiny portion of the information that WikiLeaks revealed:

https://www.opendemocracy.net/ryan-gallagher/what-has-wikileaks-ever-taught-us-read-on

(PLEASE NOTE: The link is better because it has other links that take you to the background stories)


American planes bombed a village in Southern Yemen in December 2009, killing 14 women and 21 children (see Amnesty)

The Secretary of State's office encouraged US diplomats at the United Nations to spy on their counterparts by collecting biographic & biometric information (see Wired.com)

The Obama administration worked with Republicans to protect Bush administration officials facing a criminal investigation into torture (see Mother Jones)

A US Army helicopter gunned down two Reuters journalists in Baghdad in 2007 (see Reuters)

US authorities failed to investigate hundreds of reports of abuse, torture, rape and even murder by Iraqi police and soldiers (see the Guardian)

In Iraq there were scores of claims of prison abuse by coalition forces even after the Abu Ghraib scandal (see the Bureau of Investigative Journalism)

Afghan President Hamid Karzai freed suspected drug dealers because of their political connections (see CBS News)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed support for the concept of “land swaps” (see Yahoo News)

The United States was secretly given permission from Yemen's president to attack the Al-Qaeda group in his country (see the Guardian)

Then-Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld and his top commanders repeatedly knowingly lied to the American public about rising sectarian violence in Iraq beginning in 2006 (see the Daily Beast)

The US was shipping arms to Saudi Arabia for use in northern Yemen even as it denied any role in the conflict (see Salon.com)

Saudi Arabia is one of the largest origin points for funds supporting international terrorism (see the Guardian

A storage facility housing Yemen's radioactive material was unsecured for up to a week (see Bloomberg)

Israel destroyed a Syrian nuclear reactor in 2007, fearing it was built to make a bomb (see the Sunday Times)

Top officials in several Arab countries have close links with the CIA (see the Peninsula)

Swiss company Trafigura Beheer BV dumped toxic waste at the Ivorian port of Abidjan, then attempted to silence the press from revealing it by obtaining a gagging order (see WikiLeaks)

Pakistan's government has allowed members of its spy network to hold strategy sessions on combating American troops with members of the Taliban (see the New York Times)

A stash of highly enriched uranium capable of providing enough material for multiple "dirty bombs" has been waiting in Pakistan for removal by an American team for more than three years (see CBS News)

US military Special Operations Forces have been conducting offensive operations inside Pakistan, despite repeated denials from US officials (see the Nation)

China was behind the online attack on Google (see ZDNet)

North Korea is secretly helping the military dictatorship in Myanmar build nuclear and missile sites in its jungles (see CBS News)

The Indian government "condones torture" and systematically abused detainees in the disputed region of Kashmir (see CBS News)

The British government has been training a Bangladeshi paramilitary force condemned by human rights organisations as a "government death squad" (see the Guardian)

BP suffered a blowout after a gas leak in the Caucasus country of Azerbaijan in September 2008, a year and a half before another BP blowout killed 11 workers (see the Guardian)

Saudi Arabia's rulers have deep distrust for some fellow Muslim countries, especially Pakistan and Iran (see CBS News)

Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah repeatedly urged the United States to attack Iran (see the Guardian)

Iranian Red Crescent ambulances were used to smuggle weapons to Lebanon's militant Hezbollah group during its 2006 war with Israel (see CBS News)

Dozens of US tactical nuclear weapons are in Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium (see Jerusalem Post)

The Libyan government promised "enormous repercussions" for the UK if the release of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, was not handled properly (see CBS News)

Pope Benedict impeded an investigation into alleged child sex abuse within the Catholic Church (see MSNBC)

Sinn Fein leaders Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness carried out negotiations for the Good Friday agreement with Irish then-prime minister Bertie Ahern while the two had knowledge of a bank robbery the Irish Republican Army was planning to carry out (see CBS News)

Anglo-Dutch oil giant Royal Dutch Shell PLC has infiltrated the highest levels of government in Nigeria (see the Guardian)

A US official was told by Mexican President Felipe Calderon that Latin America "needs a visible US presence" to counter
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's growing influence in the region (see Yahoo News)

Cuba's economic situation could become "fatal" within two to three years (see Business Week)

McDonald's tried to delay the US government's implementation of a free-trade agreement in order to put pressure on El Salvador to appoint neutral judges in a $24m lawsuit it was fighting in the country (see the Guardian)

British officials made a deal with the US to allow the country to keep cluster bombs in the UK despite the ban on the munitions signed by Gordon Brown (see Politics.co.uk)

The British government promised to protect America's interests during the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war (see the Guardian)

The US government was acting on behalf of GM crop firm Monsanto in 2008, when the US embassy in Paris advised Washington to start a military-style trade war against any European Union country which opposed genetically modified (GM) crops (see the Guardian)

Pfitzer tested anti-biotics on Nigerian children, contravening national and international standards on medical ethics (see Medical News Today)
Prisoners at Camp Delta (Guantanamo Bay) were denied access to the Red Cross for up to four weeks (see the Telegraph)

More than 66,000 civilians suffered “violent deaths” in Iraq between 2004 and the end of 2009 (see the Telegraph)

Russia is a “virtual mafia state” with rampant corruption and scant separation between the activities of the government and organised crime (see the Guardian)

The Obama administration tried to “sweet-talk” other countries in to taking Guantanamo detainees, as part of its (as yet unsuccessful) effort to close the prison (see the New York Times)


Shoot.... might as well make this thread go up to 400 replies! At least!

[AikidoSoul]

394. Counterpunch's John Pilger tells the story of Assange and the dangerous stage he's now entering

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/07/31/julian-assange-the-untold-story-of-an-epic-struggle-for-justice/

Julian Assange: the Untold Story of an Epic Struggle for Justice

by John Pilger -- July 31, 2014

The siege of Knightsbridge is both an emblem of gross injustice and a gruelling farce. For three years, a police cordon around the Ecuadorean embassy in London has served no purpose other than to flaunt the power of the state. It has cost £12 million. The quarry is an Australian charged with no crime, a refugee whose only security is the room given him by a brave South American country. His “crime” is to have initiated a wave of truth-telling in an era of lies, cynicism and war.

The persecution of Julian Assange is about to flare again as it enters a dangerous stage. From August 20, three quarters of the Swedish prosecutor’s case against Assange regarding sexual misconduct in 2010 will disappear as the statute of limitations expires. At the same time Washington’s obsession with Assange and WikiLeaks has intensified. Indeed, it is vindictive American power that offers the greatest threat – as Chelsea Manning and those still held in Guantanamo can attest.

The Americans are pursuing Assange because WikiLeaks exposed their epic crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq: the wholesale killing of tens of thousands of civilians, which they covered up, and their contempt for sovereignty and international law, as demonstrated vividly in their leaked diplomatic cables. WikiLeaks continues to expose criminal activity by the US, having just published top secret US intercepts – US spies’ reports detailing private phone calls of the presidents of France and Germany, and other senior officials, relating to internal European political and economic affairs.

None of this is illegal under the US Constiution. As a presidential candidate in 2008, Barack Obama, a professor of constitutional law, lauded whistleblowers as “part of a healthy democracy [and they] must be protected from reprisal”. In 2012, the campaign to re-elect President Barack Obama boasted on its website that he had prosecuted more whistleblowers in his first term than all other US presidents combined. Before Chelsea Manning had even received a trial, Obama had pronounced the whisletblower guilty. He was subsequently sentenced to 35 years in prison, having been tortured during his long pre-trial detention.

Few doubt that should the US get their hands on Assange, a similar fate awaits him. Threats of the capture and assassination of Assange became the currency of the political extremes in the US following Vice-President Joe Biden’s preposterous slur that the WikiLeaks founder was a “cyber-terrorist”. Those doubting the degree of ruthlessness Assange can expect should remember the forcing down of the Bolivian president’s plane in 2013 – wrongly believed to be carrying Edward Snowden.

SNIPPITY SNIP SNIP

This is an updated version of John Pilger’s investigation which tells the unreported story of an unrelenting campaign, in Sweden and the US, to deny Julian Assange justice and silence WikiLeaks.

For important additional information, click on the following links:

http://justice4assange.com/extraditing-assange.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/assange-could-face-espionage-trial-in-us-2154107.html

https://justice4assange.com/Timeline.html

https://justice4assange.com/Timeline.html

http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/wikileaks_doj_05192014.pdf

https://wikileaks.org/59-International-Organizations.html

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1202703/doj-letter-re-wikileaks-6-19-14.pdf

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/23/julian-assange-ecuador-and-sweden-in-tense-standoff-over-interview?CMP=twt_gu

http://assangeinsweden.com/2015/03/17/the-prosecutor-in-the-assange-case-should-be-replaced/

https://justice4assange.com/Prosecutor-cancels-Assange-meeting.html

John Pilger can be reached through his website: www.johnpilger.com

[hifiguy]

395. Anyone with a dozen brain cells can connect

The dots. Why would any government invest tens of millions in persecuting Assange for any reason other than his whistleblowing?

But now I see a ton of agreement with and interest in this post, a bit of skepticism, some of the usual BS from the defenders of the status quo. Then there is the lunatic ranting from the Total Paranoia corner, the unhinged Witchfinders General who can find "misogynist" conspiracies in pics of LOL cats. Like I would ever give a gerbil turd about anything they would ever say. I take them as seriously as I take similar nuts like Alex Jones.

Assange is in dark and dangerous waters and I hope he makes it through.

[AikidoSoul]

396. Thank you hifiguy for the opportunity to participate in your wonderful thread.

It is an honor. Your OP was precise, incisive and to the point. A very attractive invitation to participate in something intelligent.

Don't let the idiots get you down.

I did have some fun toying with them a bit.

I hope to God that Assange will survive his ordeal. God help him and keep him safe

Hugs to you both.

[hifiguy]

397. Thanks AS.

Those kinds of nitwits and Apostles of Total Paranoia irritate me, like an itch you can't reach. But that's all; they do not get me down. The world is filled with delusional dopes of all possible kinds and they're just one species in that part of the human zoo. People for whom I have zero intellectual respect cannot get me down. No way.

You handled them beautifully. Sputtering, incoherent Palinesque outrage means they've been cornered by verifiable facts and always means you've won the point.

[AikidoSoul]

428. Biden says Assange is a "high tech terrorist"

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/19/assange-high-tech-terrorist-biden

US vice-president makes strongest remarks by any White House official over WikiLeaks founder and dipomatic cables

[AikidoSoul]

406. Assange has received many awards and honors for leaking the truth about how the world

really works!

JULAIN ASSANGE was given an award by AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL that he shared in the category NEWS MEDIA .
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/jun/03/amnesty-international-media-awards

ASSANGE NAMED LE MONDE MAN OF THE YEAR" ABC News, 24 December 2010.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-12-24/assange-named-le-monde-man-of-the-year/1884984

JULIAN ASSANGE RECEIVED the Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence in 2010
http://samadamsaward.ch/julian-assange/

JULIAN ASSANGE ELECTED READER'S CHOICE FOR TIME'S PERSON OF THE YEAR 2010," Time Newsfeed, 13 December 2010.
http://newsfeed.time.com/2010/12/13/julian-assange-readers-choice-for-times-person-of-the-year-2010/

JULIAN ASSAGE was awarded THE FREEDOM AWARD -- BUCHAREST -"A Romanian online publication known for its editorial independence is honoring Wikileaks founder Julian Assange for his service to press freedom, which it warns is under threat in Eastern Europe."
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/julian-assange-given-press-freedom-award/

JULIAN ASSANGE RECEIVED the "Sydney Peace Medal - the Gold Medal for Peace and Justice from the Sydney Peace Foundation.
http://sydneypeacefoundation.org.au/peace-medal-julian-assange/

JULIAN ASSANGE RECEIVED The Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism in 2011.
http://www.marthagellhorn.com/previous.htm

JULLIAN ASSANGE RECEIVED Big Brother Award, Italia 2011
http://bba.winstonsmith.info/bbai2011.html

JULIAN ASSANGE AND WIKILEAKS received the Global Exchange Human Rights Award. 2013
http://humanrightsaward.org/past-honorees/

JULIAN ASSANGE was presented with the Courage Award from Yoko Ono Lennon. Imagine Peace. 4 February 2013. http://imaginepeace.com/archives/19347

JULIAN ASSANGE, WikilLeaks Founder was awarded Top Prize Honor by The Union of Journalists in Kazakhstan (KZO) the Kazakh Journalists' Union for his oustanding efforts in investigative journalism. Radio Free Europe. 24 June 2014.
http://www.rferl.org/content/kazakh-journalists-union-honors-wikileaks-founder/25433039.html

[AikidoSoul]

410. Here's an excellent post by MARMAR which demonstrates that the government

can destroy you easily, not only for whistleblowing but also "basic communication. MARMAR posted this in May of this year.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026680349

'It’s a warning shot—not only against whistleblowing but against basic communication......'

from The Nation:

CIA Officer Jeffrey Sterling Sentenced to Prison: The Latest Blow in the Government’s War on Journalism. It’s a warning shot—not only against whistleblowing but against basic communication with journalists by government employees.

Norman Solomon May 12, 2015


The sentencing of former CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling on May 11 for espionage ends one phase of a long ordeal and begins another. At age 47, he has received a prison term of 42 months—three and a half years—after a series of ever more improbable milestones.

The youngest of six children raised by a single mother, Sterling was the only member of his family to go to college. He graduated from law school in 1993, worked briefly at a public defender’s office, and then entered the CIA, where he became one of the agency’s only African-American case officers. In August 2001, Sterling became the first one ever to file a lawsuit against the CIA for racial discrimination. (His suit, claiming that he was denied certain assignments because of his race, was ultimately tossed out of court on grounds that a trial would jeopardize government secrets.) Soon afterward, the agency fired him.

Sterling returned to his home state of Missouri and restarted his life. After struggling, he found a professional job and fell in love. But the good times were short-lived. One day in 2006, the FBI swooped in for a raid, seizing computers and papers at the small home that Sterling and his fiancée shared in a suburb of St. Louis. Slowly, during the next four years, without further action from the government, the menacing legal cloud seemed to disperse. But suddenly, a few days into 2011, Sterling was arrested for the first time in his life—charged with betraying his country.

The indictment included seven counts under the Espionage Act, the 1917 law that President Obama’s Justice Department has used to prosecute more whistleblowers than all other administrations combined. The key charges accused Sterling of “unauthorized disclosure of national defense information,” alleging that he gave details of a secret CIA operation to a journalist while falsely characterizing it in negative terms. The government contended that Sterling should remain in custody until trial because—with “underlying selfish and vindictive motivations”—he would try to “retaliate in the same deliberate, methodical, vindictive manner.” A judge rejected that argument and released him on bond. But Sterling’s arrest had triggered his immediate firing by Anthem Healthcare (where his work as a medical fraud investigator won a national award for uncovering $32 million in bogus charges), and suddenly even low-wage employment was out of reach. As a breadwinner, Sterling was toast. His wife, Holly, a social worker, continued to bring in a modest income as they waited for the trial. ...................(more)

http://www.thenation.com/article/207017/cia-officer-jeffrey-sterling-sentenced-prison-latest-blow-governments-war-journalism

[AikidoSoul]

411. There is a vendetta against truth telling

Is DU protected? Are the poster's real names available to anyone?

It occurs to me that most any computer system can be hacked...so tell me, have there been any incidents when the government made trouble for DU posters?

AS

[AikidoSoul]

416. Propaganda galore, but also much support from respected people like Michael Moore and

Oliver Stone. Here is their co-authored opinion article about Assange in the NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/opinion/wikileaks-and-the-global-future-of-free-speech.html?_r=0

WikiLeaks and Free Speech

By MICHAEL MOORE and OLIVER STONE -- AUG. 20, 2012

WE have spent our careers as filmmakers making the case that the news media in the United States often fail to inform Americans about the uglier actions of our own government. We therefore have been deeply grateful for the accomplishments of WikiLeaks, and applaud Ecuador’s decision to grant diplomatic asylum to its founder, Julian Assange, who is now living in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London.

SNIP

Predictably, the response from those who would prefer that Americans remain in the dark has been ferocious. Top elected leaders from both parties have called Mr. Assange a “high-tech terrorist.” And Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who leads the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, has demanded that he be prosecuted under the Espionage Act. Most Americans, Britons and Swedes are unaware that Sweden has not formally charged Mr. Assange with any crime. Rather, it has issued a warrant for his arrest to question him about allegations of sexual assault in 2010.

All such allegations must be thoroughly investigated before Mr. Assange moves to a country that might put him beyond the reach of the Swedish justice system. But it is the British and Swedish governments that stand in the way of an investigation, not Mr. Assange. Swedish authorities have traveled to other countries to conduct interrogations when needed, and the WikiLeaks founder has made clear his willingness to be questioned in London. Moreover, the Ecuadorean government made a direct offer to Sweden to allow Mr. Assange to be interviewed within Ecuador’s embassy. In both instances, Sweden refused.

Mr. Assange has also committed to traveling to Sweden immediately if the Swedish government pledges that it will not extradite him to the United States. Swedish officials have shown no interest in exploring this proposal, and Foreign Minister Carl Bildt recently told a legal adviser to Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks unequivocally that Sweden would not make such a pledge. The British government would also have the right under the relevant treaty to prevent Mr. Assange’s extradition to the United States from Sweden, and has also refused to pledge that it would use this power. Ecuador’s attempts to facilitate that arrangement with both governments were rejected.

Taken together, the British and Swedish governments’ actions suggest to us that their real agenda is to get Mr. Assange to Sweden. Because of treaty and other considerations, he probably could be more easily extradited from there to the United States to face charges. Mr. Assange has every reason to fear such an outcome.The Justice Department recently confirmed that it was continuing to investigate WikiLeaks, and just-disclosed Australian government documents from this past February state that “the U.S. investigation into possible criminal conduct by Mr. Assange has been ongoing for more than a year.” WikiLeaks itself has published e-mails from Stratfor, a private intelligence corporation, which state that a grand jury has already returned a sealed indictment of Mr. Assange. And history indicates Sweden would buckle to any pressure from the United States to hand over Mr. Assange. In 2001 the Swedish government delivered two Egyptians seeking asylum to the C.I.A., which rendered them to the Mubarak regime, which tortured them.

SNIP

Michael Moore and Oliver Stone are Academy Award-winning filmmakers.

Comment from AikidoSoul: I do believe that Senator Feinstein, who calls Assange a "terrorist" has a huge conflict of interest as whe and her husband Richard Blum have made a huge amounts of money on that racket called war. And there are many other conflicts as well having to do with them making a lot of money due to her influence. I wonder if she is mentioned in WikiLeaks?

[randome]

3. Good God, you're right, Assange is no James Bond.

No one gives a shit what happens to him. He is nothing to your alleged shadowy masters of us all. It strains the imagination to think that any government cares about him other than to call him to account for his offenses in Sweden.

He didn't embarrass anyone to the extent you want to imagine. Big deal, he published some diplomatic cables. He released an edited version of the 'collateral murder' video and got caught by the public doing it.

It really saddens me to see this immense fixation on him as some sort of "people's hero". Even Wikileaks disowned him at one point.

No one cares other than wanting him to stop trying to evade the Swedish justice system.

All this slavish worship for a man who wouldn't hesitate to sell you out in order to make himself look heroic. As he did with Chelsea Manning.

He is nothing but another George Zimmerman wanna-be hero.

Desperate for heroes you may be but, please, look somewhere else. You're embarrassing yourself.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[hifiguy]

5. i cannot even begin to quantify the irrelevance of what you are attempting to say.

You don't think police and spy agencies target or entrap people.

OK.

That tells me what I need to know, Right there.

Jebus wept.

[randome]

6. Right. Because someone, somewhere might be targeted, Assange's word is automatically golden.

Remember Scott Ritter? Simply because you like someone's politics does not make them incapable of being terrible human beings in their spare time.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[hifiguy]

8. MLK was targeted. Occupy was targeted.

The people resisting Raygun's Central American war were targeted.

Assange is a threat to TPTB just like they were. He was targeted just like they were, because he defis the narrative of TPTB. He's just the latest of many. The international context is the only thing that makes ihis situation different.

What about that is so seemingly impossible for you to understand?

[msanthrope]

14. Was Scott Ritter targeted? nt

[hifiguy]

16. WTF does Scott Ritter,

whom I can barely remember, have to do with this or anything else?

Deflection, deflaction, deflection.

[msanthrope]

23. As randome indicated it's entirely possible to be politically on the right side of the spectrum

and still be an amazingly nasty bastard in your private life. even liberal men can rape.

[hifiguy]

25. But no one would have any possible reason to frame Assange, right?

;eyes:

[msanthrope]

28. how does one frame a man who has admitted to the acts described in the warrant?

Assange is main appeal point was not that he did not do the acts described in the warrant but that he did. And that those acts were not crimes in Great Britain and therefore he could not be extradited to Sweden. is Assange now part of the greatest conspiracy against him?

[reorg]

34. it was known that he couldn't say no

to women who threw themselves at him.

Nothing is easier than to set the honeytrap.

[hifiguy]

54. A bit of spycraft that is literally as old

as societies have been at war with each other. So I'd guess 5000-7500 years is a reasonable guess as to its age.

[msanthrope]

75. so now you're comparing these women to prostitutes? nt

[hifiguy]

80. Are you REALLY this ignorant about how intelligence people

operate?

And my larger point, discussed in another post, is that they may well have been coerced in some way into taking part in an action to "get" Assange. "Do X for us or suffer consequence Y" is not much of a choice, is it? That makes one a pawn and a victim, not a prostitute.

The most brutal and basic version of this approach to coercion was on full display in Abu Ghraib and Gitmo: "You tell us what we want to know or we will (a) torture you or (b) kill your family." THAT is how intelligence operations work at the level of the nitty-gritty.

[msanthrope]

83. Again....do you have any evidence? nt

[AikidoSoul]

296. US targets WikiLeaks like no other organisation (interesting 2011 news report)

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/us-targets-wikileaks-like-no-other-organisation-20111202-1obeo.html

WIKILEAKS is the target of an ''unprecedented'' US government criminal investigation, Australian diplomatic cables obtained by the Herald reveal.

The cables also show the Australian government wants to be forewarned about moves to extradite Julian Assange to the United States, but that Australian diplomats raised no concerns about him being pursued by prosecutors on charges of espionage and conspiracy.

The cables, released under freedom of information to the Herald this week, show Australian diplomats have been talking to the US Justice Department for more than a year about US criminal investigations of WikiLeaks and Mr Assange.

While the Justice Department has been reluctant to disclose details of the WikiLeaks probe, the Australian embassy in Washington reported in December 2010 that the investigation was ''unprecedented both in its scale and nature'' and that media reports that a secret grand jury had been convened in Alexandria, Virginia, were ''likely true''.

Last week the Foreign Affairs Minister, Kevin Rudd, told Parliament the government was ''not aware of any current extradition request [for Mr Assange] by US authorities'' and has ''no formal advice'' on a US grand jury investigation directed at WikiLeaks.

On Monday, Mr Assange will learn whether he will be allowed a further legal appeal against his extradition from Britain to Sweden to be questioned about sexual molestation allegations.

Mr Rudd avoided a direct answer to a question about whether Mr Assange could be subject to a ''temporary surrender'' mechanism that could allow him to be extradited from Sweden to the US. US Army Private Bradley Manning has been charged with ''aiding the enemy'' by leaking hundreds of thousands of classified government documents, published by WikiLeaks since February 2010.

SNIP

[msanthrope]

305. A newspaper article from 4 years ago is not proof of anything.

[AikidoSoul]

306. Naomi Wolf investigated and discovered that CARL ROVE is advising Sweden in prosecution of ASSANGE

She is a highly credible person here on DU and among investigative journalists.

So is Mark Crispin Miller

Eat your heart out

And read the whole thing otherwise you don't get the grisly details that document that the US' intent is to jail him for espionage.

http://markcrispinmiller.com/2011/02/eight-big-problems-with-the-case-against-assange-must-read-by-naomi-wolf/

Eight BIG PROBLEMS with the “case” against Assange (MUST-READ by Naomi Wolf)

Something Rotten in the State of Sweden: 8 Big Problems with the ‘Case’ Against Assange
by Naomi Wolf

Exclusive to News from Underground

Now that Andrew Kreig, of the Justice Integrity Project, has confirmed Karl Rove’s role as an advisor to the Swedish government in its prosecution of Julian Assange on sexual misconduct charges, it is important that we note the many glaring aberrations in the handling of Assange’s case by the authorities in Sweden.

[msanthrope]

307. Again...four years ago. And not 'proven' so much as wildly speculated.

It's rather interesting isn't it that Assange's lawyers never raised any of the supposed proof in his appeal of the extradition order in Britain??? perhaps because they were reluctant to bring to court unprovable CT?

[AikidoSoul]

313. You are the one speculating using flimsy claims void of facts or documentation.

and then you have the unbelievable nerve try to trash people like Naomi Wolf? An amazing writer who enjoys enormous respect and credibility!!!

Aren't you just a little embarrassed ?


Oy.

[msanthrope]

315. you are conflating Naomi Wolf with Naomi Klein.

Naomi wol f is most well known for writing a book about her vagina. No seriously I am not making that up......

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/roiphe/2012/09/naomi_wolf_s_new_book_about_her_vagina_is_ludicrous_.html

Naomi Klein is best known for this book......

http://www.amazon.com/The-Shock-Doctrine-Disaster-Capitalism/dp/0312427999

Naomi Klein hasn't said much about WikiLeaks over the last 5 years...... I suspect she saw Assange's cowardly dive into the Ecuadorian embassy for exactly what it was.

if you want to read what noted and respected feminists are saying about Julian Assange read this from katha Pollitt......


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/dec/27/rape-left-julian-assange-swedish-law-wikileaks

[AikidoSoul]

319. You're confused. I know the difference between Naoimi Klein and Naomi Wolf, the latter being an

expert on women's issues. It was she who analysed the Assange case because rape and legal issues concerning rape crimes, are topics she is an expert on as she worked for five years with women's organizations that help rape victims.

She has also written several books on women's issues.

If you had read her succinct analysis of the "eight things wrong" with the way the Swedish legal system is handling the Assange case, or if you had at least gone to the link I provided and read it, you would have gotten a clue. Maybe.



Go ahead and try to denigrate Naomi Wolf's intellegent assesments -- but be careful, you hair may catch on fire.

[AikidoSoul]

322. Naomi Klein, Naomi Wolf, + women's advocacy group, question nature + purpose of Assange prosecution

Assange accuser may have ceased co-operating
Guy Rundle

Sources in Sweden have told Crikey that Anna Ardin, one of the two complainants in the rape and sexual assault case against WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Julian Assange, has left Sweden, and may have ceased actively co-operating with the Swedish prosecution service and her own lawyer.

The move comes amid a growing campaign by leading Western feminists to question the investigation, and renewed confusion as to whether Sweden has actually issued charges against Assange. Naomi Klein, Naomi Wolf, and the European group Women Against Rape, have all made statements questioning the nature and purpose of the prosecution.

SNIP

Attempts by Crikey to contact Ardin by phone, fax, email and twitter were unsuccessful today.

SNIP

Ardin’s move and confusion over her involvement and the real status of the charges against Assange come as the campaign questioning the charges against him has come to include a number of leading feminist activists. Naomi Klein tweeted that:

“Rape is being used in the #Assange prosecution in the same way that women’s freedom was used to invade Afghanistan. Wake up! #wikilieaks”

While in The Huffington Post, Naomi Wolf posted a (quite funny) article asking Interpol to apprehend every date she’s had who turned out to be a narcissistic jerk.

In The Guardian Karin Axelsson of Women Against R-pe questioned why Assange’s case was being pursued more assiduously than cases of rape judged more serious (Sweden has three degrees of severity for rape charges).

SNIP

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/12/09/rundle-r-pe-case-complainant-has-left-sweden-may-have-ceased-co-operating/

[AikidoSoul]

429. Newt Gingrich says Assange "...should be treated as an enemy combatant."

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/132037-gingrich-blames-obama-on-wikileaks-labels-assange-a-terrorist

Gingrich: Leaks show Obama administration 'shallow,' 'amateurish'

By Shane D'Aprile

SNIP

He also said the U.S needs to act fast in shutting down WikiLeaks and finding Julian Assange.

"Information warfare is warfare, and Julian Assange is engaged in warfare. Information terrorism, which leads to people getting killed, is terrorism, and Julian Assange is engaged in terrorism," said Gingrich. "He should be treated as an enemy combatant."

[AikidoSoul]

364. What?! Older articles don't inform you about history of the situation?

Doomed to repeat your projections of invalidities.

[randome]

369. Just as you seem to dismiss Assange's previous flaws.

Saying that informants deserve to be killed.

Trying to foist an edited video on the public.

Letting Chelsea Manning twist in the wind.

Not contesting the Swedish allegations.

You are cherry-picking data that supports your hero and ignoring anything that doesn't.

You have no evidence of a Sweden-U.K.-U.S.-Australia conspiracy but that doesn't stop you from pushing it as far as you can.

Whereas I do have evidence that Assange is a contemptible individual, which in turn supports the idea that the Swedish issue is exactly what it appears to be.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

[AikidoSoul]

371. Who said informants "deserve to be killed" ???? Do you have a link? Any documentation at all?

Are you saying that Assange tried to "....foist an edited video on the public." ????

Is it intrinsically bad to edit a video, movie, or even a photo?

I crop photos regularly and have edited videos to make them look better. Are you insinuating something else here?

Would you like to be specific?

BTW ==-- your new sig line (you seem to change them often) says, "Precision and concision. That's the game."

Surely by the word "concision" you mean the archaic meaning of the word, which is "to cut off".... which is what your posts mostly do as they are far from being holistic.

Instead there enters archaic "concision" which is the cutting off a little piece from the whole which makes in incomplete.


The rest of your claims are not worth addressing as they are really silly. The ones I did address are barely worth answering... but you are so very narrow in your thinking that I kinda feel sorry for you. I keep hoping the bridge between your left and right brain will get repaired.

Unless of course if you work for some covert ops RW assholes.

[randome]

385. He edited out the glint of an RPG in the 'Collateral Damage' video.

Even Stephen Colbert smacked him down for that: http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/13/video-colbert-smacks-down-wikileaks-founder-over-collateral-murder-video/

And he did say that about informants. Here's one of many links, the Guardian, no less: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/sep/18/julian-assange-wikileaks-nick-cohen

At least I'm wise enough to admit I don't know everything, and that I could be wrong. You, however, have no such restraint. Everything you say is true, evidence-free, because you like Julian.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]

[AikidoSoul]

405. You twisted the facts in the Stephen Colbert interview randome

which was reported at a blogger site aptly called "HOT AIR".

Like you, the blogger intensely dislikes Assange.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/13/video-colbert-smacks-down-wikileaks-founder-over-collateral-murder-video/

In the actual video of the program Colbert was having fun like he usually does. The scene begins with an interview with Assange and the viewers laugh wildly because Colbert's head is pixilated.

Here's are excerpts of the actual Colbert Report interview with Assange. The topic is the edited footage that you Randome, think is some kind of a crime. Unfortuately the Colbert interview is polluted with your HotAir blogger friend's comments so it's important to look for Colbert quotes separated by the blogger remarks, otherwise the comments can be confusing:

(Comment by 'HotAir' blogger): "After a sort of jokey opening in which he had his face pixelated and voice altered Colbert got down to business."

Colbert: “Let’s talk about this footage that has gotten you so much attention recently. This is footage of an Apache helicopter attack in 2007. The army described this as a group that gave resistance at the time, that doesn’t seem to be happening. But there are armed men in the group, they did find a rocket propelled grenade among the group, the Reuters photographers who were regrettably killed, were not identified…You have edited this tape, and you have given it a title called ‘collateral murder.’ That’s not leaking, that’s a pure editorial.”

and later

Colbert: "And that’s not satire, that’s hardcore journalism."

(HotAir Blogger comment): Assange, meanwhile, did not appear to be at all put off by the tone of the questions, admitting that the point of the video — including the editing and the title — was to gain as much political impact as possible."

Assange says that the "full unedited material is available to the public in order that they may draw their own conclusions."

“I admire that,” says Colbert, noting that by putting ‘Collateral Damage’ on the first thing the public see “you have properly manipulated the audience into an emotional state you want before something goes on the air.”

Randome --your modus operandi is to twist and turn and try to convince someone that Assange is bad. Now you try doing that by using the opinion of another person, and idiot blogger who like you, hates Assange. Later in the blog piece the blogger calls him a "liar". Go leap into that slippery doo doo that you keep spewing but do stop trying to twist the truth to make Assange look bad. The man has enough troubles with Karl Rove breathing down his neck.

I'm not going to waste more of my time on your second "documented" accusation as I strongly suspect it's more of the same doo doo.

[AikidoSoul]

408. Spycraft uses lies of all types, but sex is both the honeytrap and the button pusher extraordinaire

Perfect quote:

"The allegations against Assange are a smokescreen behind which a number of governments are trying to clamp down on WikiLeaks for having audaciously revealed to the public their secret planning of wars and occupations with their attendant rape, murder and destruction... The authorities care so little about violence against women that they manipulate rape allegations at will. Assange has made it clear he is available for questioning by the Swedish authorities, in Britain or via Skype. Why are they refusing this essential step in their investigation? What are they afraid of?"

http://johnpilger.com/articles/wikileaks-is-a-rare-truth-teller-smearing-julian-assange-is-shameful

WikiLeaks is a rare truth-teller. Smearing Julian Assange is shameful. John Pilger

14 February 2013

Last December, I stood with supporters of WikiLeaks and Julian Assange in the bitter cold outside the Ecuadorean embassy in London. Candles were lit; the faces were young and old and from all over the world. They were there to demonstrate their human solidarity with someone whose guts they admired. They were in no doubt about the importance of what Assange had revealed and achieved, and the grave dangers he now faced. Absent entirely were the lies, spite, jealousy, opportunism and pathetic animus of a few who claim the right to guard the limits of informed public debate.

These public displays of warmth for Assange are common and seldom reported. Several thousand people packed Sydney Town Hall, with hundreds spilling into the street. In New York recently, Assange was awarded the Yoko Ono Lennon Prize for Courage. In the audience was Daniel Ellsberg, who risked all to leak the truth about the barbarism of the Vietnam war.

Like the philanthropist Jemima Khan, the investigative journalist Phillip Knightley, the acclaimed film-maker Ken Loach and others lost bail money in standing up for Julian Assange. "The US is out to crush someone who has revealed its dirty secrets," Loach wrote to me. "Extradition via Sweden is more than likely... is it difficult to choose whom to support?"

No, it is not difficult.

SNIP

It is a red herring whether Britain or Sweden holds the greatest danger of delivering Assange to the US. The Swedes have refused all requests for guarantees that he will not be dispatched under a secret arrangement with Washington; and it is the political executive in Stockholm, with its close ties to the extreme right in America, not the courts, that will make this decision.

Khan is rightly concerned about a "resolution" of the allegations of sexual misconduct in Sweden. Putting aside the tissue of falsehoods demonstrated in the evidence in this case, both women had consensual sex with Assange, and neither claimed otherwise; and the Stockholm prosecutor, Eva Finne, all but dismissed the case. As Katrin Axelsson and Lisa Longstaff of Women Against Rape wrote in the Guardian last August, "The allegations against Assange are a smokescreen behind which a number of governments are trying to clamp down on WikiLeaks for having audaciously revealed to the public their secret planning of wars and occupations with their attendant rape, murder and destruction... The authorities care so little about violence against women that they manipulate rape allegations at will. Assange has made it clear he is available for questioning by the Swedish authorities, in Britain or via Skype. Why are they refusing this essential step in their investigation? What are they afraid of?"

This article originally appeared in the New Statesman, UK

[msanthrope]

66. w ait a second you're saying Assange was forced into penetrating a sleeping woman? nt

[msanthrope]

82. You are being ungentlemanly. My suggestion is that until you can refrain

From suggesting I call a convicted pedophile you take a little break from engaging me.

[AikidoSoul]

151. Methinks you are ignoring the very basic sexual instincts of men, which many consider

a "weakness" to be exploited.

It is a well known strategy to target and destroy people for their sexual activities for political reasons.

Doesn't that ring any bells for you?

Sexual activities are scrutinized and vilified on a regular basis.

Especially here in the USA where we are known to be a bunch of hypocritical idiots when it comes to sex.

But Assange was most likely just being a sexual being when he was setup.

It is so very possible that I would put the possibility of being setup at about 99%.

Why would women make a huge public stink about his advances towards them? And, wasn't the scene that they were all in bed together to begin with?

He has no record of being a rapist. Look it up, but not on Faux Noise.

Get real on this.

[stevenleser]

165. The possibility that this was an intelligence setup is pretty close to zero.

It's not as unlikely as the sun not rising tomorrow, but it's closer to that than to being an actual possibility.

Intel agencies take the path of least resistance to getting a job done. If the CIA or Swedish intel was out to get Assange, they would have shot him.

[AikidoSoul]

172. You cannot make that analysis with any certainty whatsoever. But you can look at history

and will find that if a person is famous, he will most often be kept alive by those with enormous power. The dissident may be jailed; he may be tortured; he may be maligned; and those close to him may abandon him because of the societal pressures to hate him. He might also just have all of his resources withdrawn....such as when PayPal refused to process donations to Assange.

Those in power know very well that a story about killing a famous dissident will live forever. In other words, it is incredibly stupid to make a martyr out of a famous dissident.

It is normal however to kill off unknown dissidents. It happens with regularity.

Or else they are fired.

Or their funding is eliminated.

Or lies are circulated about them that make them a pariah.

But you already know these things in your heart.... and brain right?

[stevenleser]

173. Sure I can. The nonsense posited here is a virtual impossibility. The CIA does not have time for

this garbage for someone who is a non threat like Assange.

The CIA is busy tracking the members of ISIS and Al Qaeda and infiltrating those organizations and their affiliates and trying to prevent the next terrorist attack on the US. They are keeping an eye on Russia and China and the nonsense those countries are engaged in.

There are about a hundred thousand more serious threats to the US than Assange. I'll bet significant parts of the CIA have never even heard of him.

[AikidoSoul]

209. Reality check Mr. Leser. You need to read the book, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man

Last edited Sat Aug 15, 2015, 11:50 PM - Edit history (4)

Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins is an eye opener as to the extraordinary extent our government will go to protect the 1/10%'s economic interests.

The CIA and NSA recruit people all over the world to do their work, just like they recruited John Perkins to do their dirty work. It is well known, and Perkins says it again in the video interview below, that the common modus operadi in the recruitment game is to use what traditionally works -- gifts of irresistible sex, money and power. They usually have a handle on what weaknesses are available to exploit.

And the CIA and NSA are not so busy that they can only focus on ISIS and AlQaeda which is what you suggested. They have always had time to do what it takes to make it possible for the 1/10 % and large multi-national corporations to make trillions of dollars.

Here's an interview with "Economic Hit Man" John Perkins:

There are hundreds of other books and articles written by courageous Truth to Power individuals about similar topics.

To me it appears that you have lost your sense of our history of murder and mahem which the US uses often to get what it wants. It seems impossible to me that you didn't know about it.

But I do know that too much of the public is unaware, and want to stay that way. Mostly they are RW folks, but it's also true of some folks on DU seem to have a very narrow focus of the world. Mainly they side with the authoritarian view of those already in power. Maybe they are afraid they will become a target, or maybe they have a very low IQ. Admittedly, it's so much more peaceful (for the moment) to just politely salute the red, white and blue and let the eyes glaze over.

DU has often posted writings of US Marine Corps major general Smedly Butler, author of "War is a Racket". At the time of his service he held the highest rank available in the U.S. Marine Corps and according to him, he sincerely thought for years that he was fighting for God and country. As time went on he became more and more disillusioned. Then he shocked many, especially the USMC and the US government, when he confessed in his book and in many speeches that he finally came to realize what he was really doing when he went to war and killed people. He said he did it so that large corporations could enter those countries and make a lot of money without too much trouble from its citizens. In some ways Butler was the Assange of his age. He was horribly villified and many ugly efforts were made to discredit him.

Don't you think that by Assange's publishing those strategic communications that his actions become a huge threat to the 1/10%? Those are people who have the power to off anyone they wish or to neutralize them by putting them in jail for bogus charges. Or neutralizing their access to mass commincations such as an Internet site.

That's one of the many reasons Assange simultaneously became so skilled at escaping capture or murder. Firstly he knew that becoming world famous offers protection because when the world is curious about you, it is safe to say that the gun won't be pointed directly at your head. The next step is to disappear and become Anonymous.

His skill of disappearing for long periods with no way to track him is a very good strategy for Assange. I fear the day he is "released" from his current situation of accusations of rape. Will he then be publicly available for targeting?

Our government, says he violated US secrets and wants to jail him. Imagine the basics of the urge by the rich and powerful to nullify him. The complaint to nullify him is based on an alleged rape. But the picture is this: he was in bed with a woman who lives in the apartment Assange was invited to stay in during his visit. That same woman gave a party for him the night of the alleged "rape". But she reports in the legal documents that they went to bed after the party and had consensual sex. This she acknowleges. After they have already been sexually intimate, in the middle of the night or thereabouts, they were still in bed together and Assange initiates further sexual activity. Does their being in bed together suggest a kind of implicit permission of any sort? I don't know about you, but if I'm in bed with someone of the opposite sex it often happens that there is action in the middle of the night and one or the other of us is wakened by sexual desire of the partner, often triggered by a nudge from the other with an intimate touch. And in fact the legal documents scrutinizing this case make the point that the woman who allowed him in her bed and apartment as a guest, did not resist his sexual advances despite the fact that he may not have been wearing a condom. And the condom it turns out, according to legal documents. was her main concern, although the legal documents also say that after he expressed desire for further sex with her that she did not resist his advances.

There was more than one woman that Assange had sex with while in Sweden. Please just read the legal documents which say that neither of the women he slept with in Sweden claimed "rape", but only wanted him to be tested for veneral disease.

An aside for those who are indignant that the alleged "rape" in that case, despite the women's denial of rape.......instead of frothing at the mouth to take Assage to court on obviously bogus charges, why not prosecute the thousands of real rapes in the US that never go to trial, and where thousands of rape kits are not even tested? Give those thousands of real rape victims a freaking break and stop buying into this extraordinary intimate circumstance that the "powers chose as a reason to trump up a reason to extradite and jail Assange!

BTW, talking about WikiLeaks and anger from the 1/10 of 1 percent powerful elites. What do you think the Arab Spring was all about? It was because of the release of Assange's WikiLeaks telling the truth about how their leaders were sucking the blood out of Egypt and surrounding countries while living lives of obscene luxury. The populus ran into the streets and screamed for change, and with their cell phones created a living movement network in reaction to having been lied to for so long.

Please remember that these 1/10% leeches who are so often the topic of the WikiLeaks, do NOT limit themselves to sucking the blood out of US citizens. Any person is a target. Any country and its resources are targets.

It is said that "The truth shall set you free", but the reality is that if it costs somebody money you will most likely be punished for telling the truth and that is why Assange should be considered a hero.

But since we are being brainwashed continually by those who have a lot to lose, any activist, including Assange become a target if it costs the 1/10% a bundle. If it does, you'd better go hide and find asylum in some sympathetic country that has also been screwed by the USA--like Ecuador for example.

Cmon Mr. Lesser, you need to admit to yourself that the truth can often be dangerous to those people who have a lot to lose. Those are the ones who pay propaganda machines and publicity firms to cover what their really doing with palatable lies.

Just remember that Assange's "leaks" were the communications of our own government officials who conspired with other governments and corporations to do what they did. It caused an uproar worldwide amongst people who were angry when they discovered the depth and breadth of the lies they had been told for many years.

AHHHH..... the TRUTH

The following is taken from http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/truth

"In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
― George Orwell

"Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either."--
Albert Einstein

One of my favorites: “Above all, don't lie to yourself. The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others. And having no respect he ceases to love.”
― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov

And here's a more current statement in a script for role played by Jack Nicolson when he said to Tom Cruise in "A Few Good Men", "You want the truth? You can't take the truth!"

That seems to fit the psyche of too many naysayer DUers in this thread:

On, here's one of my very favorite quotes about truth: "I'm for truth, no matter who tells it. I'm for justice, no matter who it's for or against." - Malcolm X

[stevenleser]

211. There are all kinds of books written alleging all kinds of stuff. That doesn't make them true.

The Arab Spring was a national security risk to the leaders of those countries, not to the United States.

And finally, Assange is no threat to the 1%.

I know this conspiracy theory is irresistible to some folks. First, it protects their sacred cow, and it's exciting intrigue. But it doesn't come close to being possible.

[AikidoSoul]

216. Anyone who doesn't believe in conspiracy theory

has closed his eyes to the true ways of the world.

And as usual you missed my point about the Assange WikiLeaks being a main trigger for the Arab Spring.

No threat to the 1%? Do you even have a clue where the big money resides in this world?

Nope, of course not.

Please don't reply to me anymore. It is dull work replying to you. I'd prefer a real challenge.

[stevenleser]

233. I believe some conspiracies happen sure. This simply isn't a plausible one.

Again, I understand why it is so compelling for some folks.

The problem is, it simply doesn't make sense at all. Assange is not a threat to the government or to the national security of the United States. He's at best a minor irritant to a few folks, but so are hundreds of other journalists.

Now, if he had done the same thing to Russia he would Have been shot several years ago, but Russia's intelligence folks kill journalists who criticize the government and opposition leaders for sport and with very little provocation.

[AikidoSoul]

412. OMG -- no wonder corporations and the Rove people want to neutralize Assange

Wikileaks released TISA docs that nix public ownership of banks and open doors for massive privitization schemes all over the world.

I found one of these items in a post by WillyT in a June 2015 entry entitled:

"In Case You Missed This... 'Fast-Track Hands The Money Monopoly To Private Banks — Permanently'" which linked to a WikiLeaks story here:

http://ellenbrown.com/2015/06/11/fast-tracking-tisa-stealth-block-to-monetary-reform/


SNIP, SNIP

TiSA Exposed

On June 3, 2015, WikiLeaks released 17 key documents related to TiSA, which is considered perhaps the most important of the three deals being negotiated for “fast track” trade authority. The documents were supposed to remain classified for five years after being signed, displaying a level of secrecy that outstrips even the TPP’s four-year classification.

TiSA involves 51 countries, including every advanced economy except the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa). The deal would liberalize global trade in services covering close to 80% of the US economy, including financial services, healthcare, education, engineering, telecommunications, and many more. It would restrict how governments can manage their public laws, and it could dismantle and privatize state-owned enterprises, turning those services over to the private sector.

Recall the secret plan devised by Wall Street and U.S. Treasury officials in the 1990s to open banking to the lucrative derivatives business. To pull this off required the relaxation of banking regulations not just in the US but globally, so that money would not flee to nations with safer banking laws. The vehicle used was the Financial Services Agreement concluded under the auspices of the World Trade Organization’s General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). The plan worked, and most countries were roped into this “liberalization” of their banking rules. The upshot was that the 2008 credit crisis took down not just the US economy but economies globally.

TiSA picks up where the Financial Services Agreement left off, opening yet more doors for private banks and other commercial service industries, and slamming doors on governments that might consider opening their private banking sectors to public ownership.

SNIP

Here's the link to information about the 16 WikiLeaks TISA documents:
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121967/whats-really-going-trade-services-agreement

SNIP

"Though member parties insist that the agreement would simply stop discrimination against foreign service providers, the text shows that TiSA would restrict how governments can manage their public laws through an effective regulatory cap. It could also dismantle and privatize state-owned enterprises, and turn those services over to the private sector. You begin to sound like the guy hanging out in front of the local food co-op passing around leaflets about One World Government when you talk about TiSA, but it really would clear the way for further corporate domination over sovereign countries and their citizens."

SNIP

Corporations would get to comment on any new regulatory attempts, and enforce this regulatory straitjacket through a dispute mechanism similar to the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) process in other trade agreements, where they could win money equal to “expected future profits” lost through violations of the regulatory cap.

For an example of how this would work, let’s look at financial services. It too has a “standstill” clause, which given the unpredictability of future crises could leave governments helpless to stop a new and dangerous financial innovation. In fact, Switzerland has proposed that all TiSA countries must allow “any new financial service” to enter their market. So-called “prudential regulations” to protect investors or depositors are theoretically allowed, but they must not act contrary to TiSA rules, rendering them somewhat irrelevant.

Most controversially, all financial services suppliers could transfer individual client data out of a TiSA country for processing, regardless of national privacy laws. This free flow of data across borders is true for the e-commerce annex as well; it breaks with thousands of years of precedent on locally kept business records, and has privacy advocates alarmed.

There’s no question that these provisions reinforce Senator Elizabeth Warren’s contention that a trade deal could undermine financial regulations like the Dodd-Frank Act. The Swiss proposal on allowances for financial services could invalidate derivatives rules, for example. And harmonizing regulations between the U.S. and EU would involve some alteration, as the EU rules are less stringent.

SNIP

[AikidoSoul]

241. You said "Arab Spring was a national security risk to leaders of those countries, not to the US"

The 1/10% of the world are NOT just invested in the US --- but all over the world including the middle east, china, Europe, etc.

But you know that right?

[AikidoSoul]

415. But Joe Biden said Assange is a "terrorist". Do you think the CIA heard him? Read this:

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/31/pentagon_whistleblower_daniel_ellsberg_julian_assange

Pentagon Whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg: Julian Assange is Not a Terrorist

After WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was arrested in London, an international group of former intelligence officers and ex-government officials released a statement in support of his work. We speak to one of the signatories, Daniel Ellsberg, the famous whistleblower who leaked the Pentagon Papers about the Vietnam War in 1971. "If I released the Pentagon Papers today, the same rhetoric and the same calls would be made about me," Ellsberg says. "I would be called not only a traitor—which I was then, which was false and slanderous—but I would be called a terrorist... Assange and Bradley Manning are no more terrorists than I am." [includes rush transcript]
Transcript

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: In December, Julian Assange was arrested in London on an international warrant to face sex crimes allegations in Sweden. While he was in jail in solitary confinement in London, Democracy Now! went to Cancún, Mexico, to cover the U.N. climate talks. While there, Dan Ellsberg joined us in our New York studio. Ellsberg is perhaps this country’s most famous whistleblower. In 1971 he leaked the Pentagon Papers, the secret history of the U.S. involvement in Vietnam. He’s been speaking out in support of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. He spoke about the targeting of Julian Assange.

DANIEL ELLSBERG: Well, as I listened to Attorney General Holder on your program just now, I realize that he’s in the same position of that Attorney General Mitchell was in 40 years ago with the Pentagon Papers when they came out. We have an act of free speech, of free press, of informing the public, an act in search of a crime, in search of a law that would call it criminal. No one had ever been prosecuted for what I had done then, revealing top secrets. There had been many leaks in the past, then as now, and no one had ever been prosecuted. I was the first. The act they found was the Espionage Act, which was passed in 1917, was never intended to work as an Official Secrets Act, as in England, which would criminalize any release of classified information. But they tried it on me. I was faced with a possible 115 years in prison, which is the kind of sentence they would love to hang on Bradley Manning, who is accused of being the leaker in this case. We don’t know if he was, but I’m going to give him credit for it, since I regard it as a very admirable act, for which I thank him at this time. And if he’s — if the credit is not due, it’s due to the source, whoever that was.

So, I think, actually, what this is about, to a large extent, is trying to, once again, to instate the Espionage Act as if it were an Official Secrets Act, use it to cut down, close off unauthorized disclosures to the American public from inside the government, and also to accompany that with a legislative move to supplement it with an act that is explicitly an Official Secrets Act, one that clearly Congress intends to criminalize any release of classified information, such as the one you were just quoting to — in Cancún. I was interested that the recent release — Amy, you must have been reading it, actually, unlike most people, and found something of note in the cables that were released by the New York Times, given to them by WikiLeaks, and eventually by the source, about what Bradley Manning is reported to have said, the U.S. throwing its weight around against the poor countries of the world to exploit their resources, something that he said he was determined to expose to the American people.

SNIP --- Go to above link for the rest of a lengthy interview with Amy Goodman.

[randome]

167. He has a history of admitting to the accusations.

I guess Obama and the CIA made him do that, too.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[AikidoSoul]

210. Where is your documentation for these admissions? I'd like to see the

exact quotes, or better yet a videotaped confession.

You know as well as I do that it does not exist.

[randome]

227. See msanthrope's link regarding the transcripts.

You can read, right?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[AikidoSoul]

242. If you read the transcript you refer to you would have to admit that you're wrong. Look at your

sig line that says:

"I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it. So then I'm right about being wrong. "

Well.................... .........................I'm waiting. Admit that you're wrong randome.

[randome]

255. You can read, right? Below is a snippet. Assange is not contesting the allegations.

He's contesting that the actions don't amount to rape. But the U.K. agrees with Sweden that a rape by any other name is still rape.

There are four allegations as set out in box (e) of the warrant:
1. On 13th – 14th August 2010, in the home of the injured party [name given] in Stockholm, Assange, by using violence, forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party’s arms and a forceful spreading of her legs whilst lying on top of her and with his body weight preventing her from moving or shifting.
2. On 13th – 14th August 2010, in the home of the injured party [name given] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity. Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge.
3. On 18th August 2010 or on any of the days before or after that date, in the home of the injured party [name given] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity i.e. lying next to her and pressing his naked, erect penis to her body.
4. On 17th August 2010, in the home of the injured party [name given] in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state. It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party’s sexual integrity.

The framework list is ticked for “Rape”. This is a reference to an allegation 4. The other three allegations are described in box (e) II using the same wording as set out above.
As far as offences, 1,2, and 3 are concerned it is argued that these do not constitute extradition offences because the conduct alleged would not amount to an offence against English law. The court must apply the “conduct test” of double criminality. That means the court must consider whether the conduct alleged would amount to an offence under English law as if it had occurred in this jurisdiction. The applicant must establish this
proposition to the criminal standard of proof. What must be proved is that the conduct, if it were established, would constitute the extradition offence relied on here. Although detailed separate argument has been made about each of the three offences, it amounts in essence to this: the description provided does not permit an inference that there was a lack of consent by the complainant, nor that the respondent did not reasonably believe
the complainant to be consenting.

The difference between us, I think, is that I will always admit to the possibility of being wrong about something. I may not have all the information I need. I don't see that same outlook from you. You simply know that a world-wide grand conspiracy is behind an attempt to 'get' Assange because you like him. That's not evidence of anything.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

[AikidoSoul]

261. Unless you can provide a link, your post is trash to me.

What you very obviously continue to ignore, no matter what the source of your information is --is the fact that dissidents including Assange, are routinely targeted by the rich and powerful because documenting the truth about how the 1/10% operates is a threat to their power, position, and money.

Assange revealed the lies and plots to rig an international system of politics and moneymaking. That is big stuff and if you were in the position of the 1/10 percent, you would be royally pissed, instead of piss-ant pissed.

The spelling in your item looks like it was written by a Brit. Brits have a lot to lose by defending Assange, or even attempting to facilitate real justice for him. They go with the US modus operandi on a regular basis because the Brits and the US have so much in common, economically and politically.

If you continue to deny that it is the normal modus operandi of our government, and other governments, to protect the rich and powerful by destroying dissidents who threaten their curtained lies so they can protect their power and money, then you are wading in deep dummy water.

Show us the link to the "warrant" you posted so we can see the source -- or kiss your credibility goodbye forever.

Even if that if that statement really did come from UK authorities, that they are obligated to protect the 1/10% as is the USA and other complicit governments. The super rich and super powerful are very, very angry and horrified by the WikiLeaks revelations about their lies and rigging. They live all over the world, and in fact own most of it.

BTW, the entire snippets you quoted look like cheap porn written by someone who knows how to inflame emotions from people who are vulnerable and horrified by explicit sexual descriptions. Even normal lovemaking would make many vulnerable people puke if it is described in detail. Pushing buttons is a typical tactic propaganda spewers.

Give me the link!

[randome]

282. I already told you it comes from msanthrope's previous link.

Last edited Sun Aug 16, 2015, 08:04 PM - Edit history (1)

Here it is again, for like the fourth time in this thread: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110224-Britain-Ruling-Assange-Extradition-to-Sweden.pdf

You can say you've won this debate, however. It's not worth my time to keep presenting you with this link you apparently can't read. You are determined to assume that there is a grand, world-wide conspiracy to 'get' Assange without any evidence other than your desire to think that.

As I said before, we will have this same conversation next year and the year after that and the year after that. Because your beloved Julian is a coward and you want to believe everything he says.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

[AikidoSoul]

293. Don't you understand randome, Julian Assange was never CHARGED with these allegations

You seem to have difficulty seeing through the delaying tactics used by the Swedish prosecutor.

Now we come to find out that Carl Rove is advising the Swedish government about this case because he wants Assange extradited to the US for espionage to protect his 1/10% friends who own him and most of the world.

You really are using the narrowest lens to see this story and its implications.

[cemaphonic]

298. Yeah that's some genius legal tactic there

Delay the prosecution until the statute of limitations runs out. Those crafty Swedes.

Or it could be that the delay has something to do with Assange hiding out in the embassy, outside of Swedish jurisdiction for the last 3 years.

[AikidoSoul]

321. Swedish prosecution drops 2 of 4 allegations against Assange due to statute of limitations expiry

This tactic of dropping the allegations after five years has more to do with being the result of their ongoing strategy. By delaying it until allegations could be dropped, Assange would not be given the chance to prove his innocence in court. He had tried repeatedly to get the Swedish prosecutor Ny, to set up an interview which then might follow with an official charge, but she repeatedly failed to arrange for him to be questioned. These people did NOT want him to be vindicated. They wanted him to remain of "questionable character."

Swedish prosecutors have withdrawn two sex crime allegations against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange after they expired under statute of limitations law. One more allegation is due to expire on August 18, while a fourth and final one will remain in force for years to come.

https://www.rt.com/news/312332-assange-charges-expire-sweden/

Swedish prosecution drops 2 of 4 allegations against Assange due to statute of limitations expiry

While the sexual assault allegations are being dropped this month, the more serious rape allegation only expires after 10 years, meaning it would be dropped in 2020.

Sweden has for years refused to question Assange in the Ecuadorean embassy. An attempt to organize an interview by prosecutors was dropped in April after both sides accused each other of blocking the proceedings.

A lawyer for Assange, Per Samuelson, said Thursday it was regrettable that the Swedish prosecutor had allowed the charges to expire rather than allow his client to defend his name, adding that his three-year embassy confinement can be compared to serving a prison term.

Please notice that the word "allegation" is used throughout for a simple reason -- Assange WAS NEVER CHARGED with crimes related to those allegations. And is well known that the Swedish prosecutor repeatedly refused to interview him, both in Sweden and England. She has been accused by many legal experts of refusing to pursue the case in order to keep Assange in Limbo, for political reasons.

[AikidoSoul]

294. Don't you understand randome, Julian Assange was never CHARGED with these allegations

You seem to have difficulty seeing through the delaying tactics used by the Swedish prosecutor.

Now we come to find out that Carl Rove is advising the Swedish government about this case because he wants Assange extradited to the US for espionage to protect his 1/10% friends who own him and most of the world.

You really are using the narrowest lens to see this story and its implications.

[AikidoSoul]

214. Look, Assange was staying at the apartment of one of the women he had sex with.

Last edited Sat Aug 15, 2015, 10:52 PM - Edit history (2)

She admits she had sex with him. And so did the other woman he had sex with while in Sweden. Neither of them accused him of rape. They told the police that they simply wanted him tested for venereal disease because they thought the sex may have been "unprotected". The police asked if Assange had raped them and they said no.

In Sweden police and prosecutorial apparatus don't need the "victim's" permission to conduct an investigation. Even if a sexual partner denies that rape took place, the police can file it as a rape case because sexual conduct laws in Sweden are designated as "public prosecution laws." But when asked to sign the government's rape accusation papers, the women refused. The Swedish prosecutor issued a warrant for Assange's arrest the very night after the women asked for the medical testing.

There is much foolishness on DU by those who consider Sweden to really be a "neutral" country, but it's an image Sweden likes to foster. The US ambassador to Sweden uses the flimsy neutrality status as a convenient image to convey a badge of trust. That's partly how they convinced the US and her partners of Sweden’s "neutral status" when providing intelligence to our government on the Iranian nuclear project.

The truth is that they have long been in bed with the US for strong economic and military security reasons. For that, you will have to read some history.

Sweden would gladly destroy Assange for the benefit of US interests, a/k/a the interests of the 1/10 %.

[hifiguy]

247. Oops. You're telling a bunch of inconvenient truths.

Prepare to be swarmed by our resident trolls.

[AikidoSoul]

348. Has there ever been a man pursued like this for such nonsense?

Julian Assange is doing a much better job of telling the truth than thousands he's exposed for lying.

I cannot understand why some DUers refuse to realize that it's Assange's WikiLeaks that are the reason that so many powerful people will do anything to destroy him.

[AikidoSoul]

295. Julian Assange: The Untold Story Of An Epic Struggle For Justice

https://newmatilda.com/2015/07/31/julian-assange-untold-story-epic-struggle-justice

Those doubting the degree of ruthlessness Assange can expect should remember the forcing down of the Bolivian president's plane in 2013 - wrongly believed to be carrying Edward Snowden.

According to documents released by Snowden, Assange is on a "manhunt target list". Washington's bid to get him, say Australian diplomatic cables, is "unprecedented in scale and nature".

In Alexandria, Virginia, a secret grand jury has spent five years attempting to contrive a crime for which Assange can be prosecuted. This is not easy. The First Amendment to the US Constitution protects publishers, journalists and whistleblowers.

Faced with this constitutional hurdle, the US Justice Department has contrived charges of “espionage”, “conspiracy to commit espionage”, “conversion” (theft of government property), “computer fraud and abuse” (computer hacking) and general “conspiracy”.

The Espionage Act has life in prison and death penalty provisions.

[AikidoSoul]

432. Vladimir Putin criticizes the detention and motives to frame Assange

http://www.smh.com.au//breaking-news-world/putin-leads-backlash-over-wikileaks-boss-detention-20101209-18rgi.html

Putin leads backlash over WikiLeaks boss detention

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin Thursday led growing support from some world leaders for the beleaguered WikiLeaks founder, describing his detention in Britain as "undemocratic".

SNIP

Putin railed against the detention of the 39-year-old Assange, the Australian founder of the website which has been releasing thousands of secret US diplomatic cables as well as Pentagon communiques.

"Why was Mr. Assange hidden in jail? Is that democracy? As we say in the village: the pot is calling the kettle black," Putin said.

"I want to send the ball back to our American colleagues," Putin added.

Despite his defence of Assange, Putin was portrayed in an embarrassing light by some of the leaked cables. In one, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called him a "behind the scenes puppeteer" dissatisfied with his role.

Others detailed allegations of high-level Russian corruption and referred to Putin as an "alpha dog".

His comments echoed Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who expressed "solidarity" with Assange, blasting the Australian activist's arrest as a blow against "freedom of expression".

SNIP

[reorg]

33. So you and the other poster are Assange supporters,

and you are steadfast in your belief he is 'on the right side of the spectrum'?

Forgive me if I'm ROFL.

[AikidoSoul]

212. So someone with great courage, who is also brilliant, risks his life

and reputation and that makes you laugh?

It doesn't seem that you respect the notion that US citizens are entitled to the truth in our so called democracy.

[AikidoSoul]

407. I'm in good company as far as supporters go, both here

in this thread, and by the organizations that have given him many awards and recognition for his courage and achievements.

For the list of those awards.... see post 466.

[AikidoSoul]

240. Jeez....it must be frustrating to have to deal with this kind of

non-sequiter distraction from your most excellent and collectible post.

Is Reply #16 simply a strategic distraction? A case of brain damage? A person chronically exposed to comic books as reading material as a child? Was he a child who went to a military school where they beat the shit out of dissident students? Was he a child of a military captain type authoritarian who spanked the crap of him for having an opinion? Was he a former member of the military who was brainwashed to the point that he does not have thoughts he can call his own?

Am still trying to figure this stuff out.

Wish there was some history on each of the posters.

I want to continue posting to DU, but there are SO FEW OF YOU hifyguy.

It seems awfully lonely here!

[hifiguy]

243. Du has really devolved in the last few years.

Last edited Sat Aug 15, 2015, 07:57 PM - Edit history (1)

The miserble, shitty, inexcusable Witchfinders General, who can find "misogynist" conspiracy in the statement "I really like cats" have been allowed to run roughshod for years without ever getting the tombstones that should have been handed out long, long ago. Their word and idea policing and alert-stalking led met to leave DU for a year beginning in summer 2013. But there are too many wonderful people here and I will not be run off: Cal Peggy, Octafish, WillyT, Warren deMontague, SCE, LynneSin, Miles Archer, the Bernie group and so many others I like and respect. they make my world a better place and I will not let the shrieking assholes deprive me of their company.

The original Witchfinders General have now been joined by an equally deranged bunch of idiots who can find racism in the same statement. My personal approach is to avoid dealing with these morons, who are as incorregibly imbecilic and simple-minded as any other kind of fundy.

Fuck them all, with a red-hot poker. They are not true liberals/progressives/socialists. They are totalitarian shitheels. They are just single-minded, single-issue ideologues who deserve all the scorn that can be poured upon them. Scorn which I will happily continue to pour at every opportunity. The world and humans are not perfectable. I just think we should all try to make the world better place while remaining humble in that realization. In the words of the brilliant Reinhold Niebuhr, politics is the process of seeking proximate solutions to insoluble problems.

And that's that.

[AikidoSoul]

254. Thank you for the explanation and especially your committment to stay

on DU to enjoy the company and intelligence of those who are worthy of respect.

I was glad to see that some of the more respected DUers did come to your thread to support you by making cogent remarks.

The Assange story is a very important one. I was happy to participate.

I'm worried about Assange's future. To me he is a hero, but doubt that enough people will understand his significance in our lifetime to give him the supreme reward of being vindicated for educating the public so that we can take appropriate steps to right the wrongs that continue...and in fact are getting worse each day.

Your comments about the devolution of DU are on target. I lurked here for awhile and it seemed OK to start posting things, but I frankly have been horrified at the responses I get to many of my threads. And since it happens repeatedly I have often shied away from starting threads on DU. It seems that the same DUers show up everytime I write about toxic injury -- a topic that I know well. DU has a bad reputation for being a forum where scientific discussions devolve into shallow, uneducated attacks with very little valid documentation.

There is adequate evidence that many posters are paid by groups and corporations to create controversy about topics that if the truth is known, would cost them a lot of $$. The paid posters create "Google Alerts" with key words which instantly surface in their emails so they can immediately go on the attack. There are plenty of Liars for Hire funded by chem/pharm. Many of them are scientists. Even chairs of universities' and their departments are funded heavily and kept in line by wealthy corporations. I only liason with independent researchers and scientists who are horrified at what is happening to our brains, DNA, behavior, etc.

When I do post something about toxic injury I've noticed that ugly comments surface within a couple of minutes. Usually it's a short sentence or two denigrating the post with ugly, frivilous comments. Unfortunately, when other DUers see the first four or five petty attacks, most of them just back off and the post dies a quiet death probably because it just looks so ugly and un-appealing. If they didn't shy away and stayed to fight the battle, it would perhaps help to keep the Witchfinders at bay.

I wish there were more people who are educated about toxic injury. Toxic injury is one of the main reasons why people are so incredibly stupid in the USA. Recently I posted an important international study documenting the fact that citizens of the US have nearly four hundred times as many early onset dementia deaths as other countries. There are good reasons for that. Ubiquitous neurotoxins reduce IQ. That has been repeatedly proven scientifically. But like lemmings, despite the scientific revelations, we continue to bombard ourselves with neurotoxic chemicals in almost everything we touch, eat, wear and breathe! Europe will not allow approximately 30,000 of the nearly 90,000 synthetic chemicals in the market. The U.S. has no such restrictions.

I pray that Bernie gets some real security soon. I'm uneasy about looking to one person (along with Elizabeth Warren and a few others) to lead us into a different direction, but in my lifetime Bernie is the only presidential candidate that seems to understand and articulate the enormous problems that we now face. I give Martin Luther King, Jimmy Carter, Bobby Kennedy and Jack Kennedy and others who made it to the top leadership a lot of credit for doing much to make the world a better place. But it's a much more dangerous time now and the challenges are much more dangerous. What is good and different I think is that many more of us know how we got where we are, and the tactics used to rig the system. So while we have an awful lot of dumbasses in our midst, at least the information is more available now than ever before. If you have a decent IQ and are capable of critical and lateral thinking... the political/economic realities come into sharper focus.

I know you are not religious, and while I was raised a Catholic and went to parochial schools -- I never felt much in the way of admiration for Catholic religious leaders with the exception of those who died in Central America trying to find justice for the poor and afflicted. But now there is Pope Francis, and he has teamed up with Naoimi Klein in an effort to create a palatable message about the urgency of doing something about climate change. That excites me greatly. Francis is the only pope I've ever seen in my lifetime who represents the teachings of Christ by doing his best to emulate His behavior. This of course, as you already know, can be boiled down to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

Thank you very much for doing the work that you do. When I can, I wil join in to offer support to keep the discussion going. I think you have valuable contributions to make to our often frustrating discussion forum.

[hifiguy]

301. Thanks. There are a lot of good, very smart people here

from whom I have learned much. The HRH fanboys/girls seem to be going all out attacking Bernie supporters everywhere outside the Sanders group.

It has been a real pleasure to make your acquaintance on this thread. Rock on, AS. I am going nowhere.

[AikidoSoul]

372. Why can't you admit that Assange is being targeted by Karl Rove and Company

Why the distraction doo doo about Scott Ritter?


http://www.swedishwire.com/politics/8048-karl-rove-behind-swedens-hunt-for-assange

Former Bush White House strategist Karl Rove may be a leading role in the try to prosecute WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, according to sources for several legal experts.

Karl Rove was senior advisor to former U.S. President George W Bush. He is also advisor to Sweden’s Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt.

Several legal experts now suggest that Karl Rove is likely to be involved in advising the Swedish government how Julian Assange can be extradited to the US via the Scandinavian country.

[randome]

26. How is he a threat? He's a narcissistic buffoon!

Wikileaks disowned him when he said he didn't care if informants suffered because of him.

Think of all the conspiracy players you imagine and I can't for the life of me understand how you can sustain this:
Australia
The Swedish justice system
The Swedish appeals court
The Swedish women
The U.K. justice system
The U.K. appeals court
The U.S.

Do you seriously think that all these countries and people are working in concert simply to 'get' Assange?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[reorg]

35. Of course, as a former or current member

of the military it is totally impossible for you to imagine that NATO partners may cooperate, their intelligence services included.

[randome]

46. What do intelligence services have to do with courts of law?

How many people do you believe that Obama is blackmailing in order to 'get' Assange? 50? 100? I'm sorry, to believe that all these people are working in concert with one another is a foolish notion based on wanting to believe in heroes instead of looking at things as they really are.

Or as they appear to be. The facts, since Assange admitted to the acts of which he is accused, are not in dispute.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[hifiguy]

56. The FBI framed Ethel Rosenberg

and tried to frame MLK as only the most prominent examples I can think of.

No, LEOs and spies would never frame anyone.

[randome]

72. And you base this on the word of a man accused of a crime?

Well, accused rapists would never try to invent an excuse for their actions, would they?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[hifiguy]

84. So someone who has been ACCUSED, but not CONVICTED

of a crime is by nature untrustworthy. OK. Accusation w/oconviction = guilt. You have some nasty authoritarian tendencies.



"If you're a suspect, of course that means you're not innocent." Reagan Attorney General Edwin Meese

[zeemike]

111. It is a waste of time to try to reason with a lynch mob.

They have already convicted him in their mind.

And hear we go again...the same people with the same reason why they know he is guilty because the accusers would never lie...and neither does the CIA and FBI.

[hifiguy]

113. Indeed.

I remember a couple of years ago when a mob consisting of many of the same members swarmed SCE's Sunday LOLCats over a suposedly "misogynist" cartoon he posted and nearly drove that wonderful chap and DU instituition away from DU.

And that in itself speaks volumes about this particular mob. Tiny angry people with tiny angry one-track minds.

[zeemike]

116. Yep I remember that fiasco.

As it turned out WE got angry at the lynch mob and saved a wonderful DU institution.

I think it is basically a case of power corupting...when a mob forms they feel powerful and need to exercises it. Fairness and reason never enters their mind.

[hifiguy]

122. They have been allowed to bully and shout down people for a long while.

And for the life of me I cannot understand why it has been permitted.

[zeemike]

126. One can only speculate.

But we are all equal, but some are more equal than others.

[Kali]

177. uh, if I recall that was one whacky person that went after SCE and

I believe they have been subsequently banned (though I don't remember if it was for that incident or something a bit later)

it was not a mob

[AikidoSoul]

215. You took the words out of my mouth zeemike. It's a waste of precious time to argue with

those folks who cannot, for whatever their reasons, see the facts as they stand, or the patterns that have played out over and over again of activists being targeted and destroyed for telling the truth which cost somebody with power and influence.

I've stopped replying to these absolutist "thinkers" who have linear views of their tiny world.

[randome]

145. If he won't face his accusers, he can never be convicted.

How hard is that to understand? Objectivity means letting the evidence speak for itself. Assange seems to think that his word trumps everyone else's. He's already admitted to the accusations.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[hifiguy]

183. You really think he would get a fair trial?

What color is the sky in your world, anyway?

[randome]

189. Right again. Fully half the world is engaged in this grand conspiracy theory of yours.

You ignore the fact that Assange admitted to the accusations.

You ignore the fact that he was free in the U.K. for two years before hiding in Ecuador.

You ignore the fact that he let Chelsea Manning go to jail instead of helping her.

You ignore the fact that he tried to foist an edited video on the public.

You ignore the fact that even his native country, Australia, doesn't come to his aid.

Your slavish hero worship is sad to see. And in the end, nothing will change. Assange will still be hiding out in Ecuador and we will be having this same conversation next year and the year after that and the year after that.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[AikidoSoul]

224. You have not documented a damned thing

and neither have you documented your criticisms and claims about the "rapes" and the court documents. Your comments have basically twisted this entire topic into an unknown shape.

Fortunately, it seems most of the DUers here can see through you.

If you can't document what you say.... then please desist.

You may be the first person I've ever put on IGNORE ---

[AikidoSoul]

217. Randome, I suggest you follow the advice of your sig line. Get a very good, very, very

LONG night's sleep.

How about going to bed now?

[randome]

226. Well, that's certainly a cogent debating point, isn't it?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[stevenleser]

128. The FBI are not foreign spies, they are a domestic law enforcement organization. nt

[hifiguy]

134. Ask Ethel Rosenberg how much difference that made.

Oh, that's right, she was executed for something she did not do. The FBI tried to frame MLK and virtually every other civil rights leader during the 1960s. They infiltrated and disrupted countless anti-war groups in the same period. They spied on peace groups all through the 1980s and they spy on Occupy today.

The CIA's record of madness, beginning with the overthrow of Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953, is an open book for anyone who seeks to read it. Assassination attempts directed at Castro ringin' any bells? The CIA participated in the overthrow of Patrice Lumumba, directly brought about the overthrow and assassination of Salvador Allende, an operation overseen by Hillary's good buddy Henry Kissinger, backed Reagan's wars in Central America and helped get the Taliban off the ground when they were just scattered mujahadin.

Anyone who thinks the CIA could not be and is not behind the Assange business up to its elbows is fooling only themself. That is what history teaches.

[stevenleser]

135. Ethel Rosenberg isnt the issue. You are using what a different agency did to make your point. And

it is wrong to do so.

[hifiguy]

137. The meta-point is a simple one:

The United States has always used intelligence and law-enforcement agencies to persecute dissenters by any and all means possible, right up to assassination.

Historical truth.

[stevenleser]

138. First off, Assange isn't a dissenter. He's not a US citizen. This isn't a movie or a cartoon.

The FBI is not the CIA and even the FBI is not the J. Edgar Hoover FBI of Ethel Rosenberg times. The various inaccuracies and liberties you take with your analogies and analysis may work for some folks but it doesn't work for me.

Having actually spoken with folks in intelligence agencies I can tell you that they are very no-nonsense folks. They are certainly not above an elaborate conspiracy scheme if that is what it takes to accomplish something but that is a last resort. The first and most likely action that any intelligence agency would take against someone who poses enough of a security risk that they are tasked to deal with them is to shoot that person. And there would have been no reason not to do that in Assange's case if the CIA had been assigned to deal with him. The rape charge accomplishes nothing that silencing him permanently several years ago wouldnt have accomplished and would have done better.

The bigger problem you have is that Assange isn't one one thousandth the national security threat that would have gotten the CIA ordered to take action against him. The CIA is overtasked with trying to prevent the next terrorist attack. They are tracking tens of thousands of people all over the globe, trying to infiltrate and track every Al-Qaeda and ISIS affiliate and on top of that Russia and China are behaving badly and they are a big concern. Assange is nothing compared to any of that.

[AikidoSoul]

414. But don't forget, Joe Biden called Assange a "terrorist".

Joe Biden must be a tool. I used to think highly of him, but no more.

[elias49]

149. Sure have.

But a jingoist is a jingoist.
Or maybe it's extreme naiveté.

[AikidoSoul]

404. Justice Department officials privately described investigation as being "unprecedented in scale

http://www.smh.com.au/world/assange-targeted-by-fbi-probe-us-court-documents-reveal-20140520-38l1p.html

Assange targeted by FBI probe, US court documents reveal
May 20, 2014 --- Philip Dorling

WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange remains the subject of an active criminal investigation by the United States Justice Department and Federal Bureau of Investigation, newly published court documents reveal. Papers released in US legal proceedings have revealed that a "criminal/national security investigation" by the US Department of Justice and FBI probe of WikiLeaks is "a multi-subject investigation" that is still "active and ongoing" more than four years after the anti-secrecy website began publishing secret US diplomatic and military documents.

Confirmation that US prosecutors have not closed the book on WikiLeaks and Mr Assange comes as a consequence of litigation by the US Electronic Privacy Information Centre to enforce a freedom of information request for documents relating to the FBI's WikiLeaks investigation. Justice Department lawyers last month told the US District Court in Washington DC that there had been "developments in the investigation over the last year." In a document filed with the court on Monday, the US Government further affirmed that the "main, multi-subject, criminal investigation of the [Department of Justice] and FBI remains open and pending" making it necessary "to withhold law enforcement records related to this civilian investigation."

In August 2013 US Army private Chelsea Manning, formerly Bradley Manning, was sentenced to 35 years imprisonment, with the possibility of parole in eight years, as a consequence of his conviction on espionage and other charges for leaking thousands of classified US military and diplomatic documents to WikiLeaks. During Private Manning's trial US military prosecutors made repeated references to Mr Assange, alleging that the WikiLeaks publisher guided and directed the soldier's disclosure of classified information.

The US Department of Justice opened an investigation of WikiLeaks after Private Manning's arrest in May 2010. Australian diplomatic cables released to Fairfax Media under freedom of information laws later revealed that senior Justice Department officials privately described the investigation as being "unprecedented in scale and nature."

SNIP

[AikidoSoul]

258. Bwaa hahaha, OMG do you really think that's true? Here's the link to the FBI's international website

Holy tamale stevenlesser, the FBI has had international offices for NEARLY SEVENTY YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/international_operations

TINY SNIP:

Crime and terror have gone global. And so have we.

For nearly seven decades, the FBI has stationed special agents and other personnel overseas to help protect Americans back home by building relationships with principal law enforcement, intelligence, and security services around the globe that help ensure a prompt and continuous exchange of information.

Today, we have 64 legal attaché offices—commonly known as legats—and more than a dozen smaller sub-offices in key cities around the globe, providing coverage for more than 200 countries, territories, and islands. Each office is established through mutual agreement with the host country and is situated in the U.S. embassy or consulate in that nation.

Stevenleser you need to start educating yourself instead of embarrassing yourself.

[stevenleser]

259. Do you understand what all of that means? I doubt it, in fact I am sure you don't. From YOUR link...

Crime and terror have gone global. And so have we.
For nearly seven decades, the FBI has stationed special agents and other personnel overseas to help protect Americans back home by building relationships with principal law enforcement, intelligence, and security services around the globe that help ensure a prompt and continuous exchange of information.

Today, we have 64 legal attaché offices—commonly known as legats—and more than a dozen smaller sub-offices in key cities around the globe, providing coverage for more than 200 countries, territories, and islands. Each office is established through mutual agreement with the host country and is situated in the U.S. embassy or consulate in that nation.

Our legal attaché program is managed by the International Operations Division at FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C. This office keeps in close contact with other federal agencies, Interpol, foreign police and security officers in Washington, and national and international law enforcement associations. International liaison and information sharing are conducted in accordance with executive orders, laws, treaties, Attorney General Guidelines, FBI policies, and interagency agreements.

---------------------------------------------------
Do you really not understand the difference between that and an intelligence organization?

[AikidoSoul]

262. Wow. You are really a crazy expert in twisting things around. A real gobbledegook expert.

You basically just reposted my post that countered your claim that the FBI only has jurisdiction in the USA.

I proved you wrong.

And then you twisted it into a poopy knot.

O.K. You are on ignore. YOU ARE THE FIRST PERSON I'VE EVER PUT ON IGNORE!

You are an enormous waste of time for any serious person with half a brain.

[stevenleser]

263. You didn't prove me wrong, you proved you dont know the difference between a law enforcement agency

and an intelligence agency.

And you are embarrassed by that so you are putting me on ignore. Which I think is great btw. Please proceed!

[AikidoSoul]

267. The FBI works both domestic and foreign intelligence

I know your intention is to obfuscate but, it just won't work on me.

Maybe others will be naiive and eat your poopy distortions.

Here's the quote from the FBI's website once again. It's only the portion relevant to your distorted claim.

But hey....if you actually went to the FBI link I provided they go into more detail...if that's not too much work for you.

For nearly seven decades, the FBI has stationed special agents and other personnel overseas to help protect Americans back home by building relationships with principal law enforcement, intelligence, and security services around the globe that help ensure a prompt and continuous exchange of information.

I highlighted the areas that seem to have leaked out of your consciousness.

Intelligence is the exchange of credible information... something you need to do more of.

Maybe you should notify the FBI and inform them that they're only a domestic law enforcement agency and not allowed to do foreign intelligence gathering. They will probably either laugh at you or investigate you. Or both. Or maybe you are one of them?

OK... I'm not going to put on on IGNORE only because I don't want you or anybody else to think that my silence means that I agree with you. That will probably will never happen!

[stevenleser]

268. LOL, I thought you put me on ignore...

Now we are getting somewhere.

The FBI does not do foreign intelligence. They do domestic counter-intelligence. That is they seek to defeat spying that other countries are doing here, yes. But they are not an intelligence organization.

Their liaisons overseas are to assist in domestic law enforcement here in the US.

Eventually you will get it. Keep trying.

[AikidoSoul]

271. You need to read FBI public docs. The FBI can do more foreign intelligence since the Patriot Act

https://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/usa-patriot-act-amendments-to-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-authorities

Alberto R. Gonzales and Robert S. Mueller, III
Attorney General of the United States, Director
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Select Committee on Intelligence United States Senate
Washington, DC
April 27, 2005

Chairman Roberts, Vice Chairman Rockefeller, and Members of the Committee:

We are pleased to be here today to discuss the government’s use of authorities granted to

it by Congress under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA). In particular, we

appreciate the opportunity to have a candid discussion about the impact of the amendments to

FISA made by the USA PATRIOT Act and how critical they are to the government’s ability to

successfully prosecute the war on terrorism and prevent another attack like that of September 11

from ever happening again.

As we stated in our testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, we are open to

suggestions for strengthening and clarifying the USA PATRIOT Act, and we look forward to

meeting with people both inside and outside of Congress who have expressed views about the

Act. However, we will not support any proposal that would undermine our ability to combat

terrorism effectively.

I. FISA Statistics

First, we would like to talk with you about the use of FISA generally. Since September

11, the volume of applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA court) has

dramatically increased.

• In 2000, 1,012 applications for surveillance or search were filed under FISA. As

the Department’s public annual FISA report sent to Congress on April 1, 2005

states, in 2004 we filed 1,758 applications, a 74% increase in four years.

• Of the 1,758 applications made in 2004, none were denied, although 94 were

modified by the FISA court in some substantive way.

II. Key Uses of FISA Authorities in the War on Terrorism

In enacting the USA PATRIOT Act, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year

2002, and the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, Congress provided the

government with vital tools that it has used regularly and effectively in its war on terrorism. The

reforms contained in those measures affect every single application made by the Department for

electronic surveillance or physical search of suspected terrorists and have enabled the government

to become quicker and more flexible in gathering critical intelligence information on suspected

terrorists. It is because of the key importance of these tools to the war on terror that we ask you

to reauthorize the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act scheduled to expire at the end of this

-2-

year. Of particular concern is section 206's authorization of multipoint or “roving” wiretaps,

section 207's expansion of FISA’s authorization periods for certain cases, section 214's revision of

the legal standard for installing and using pen register / trap and trace devices, and section 215's

grant of the ability to obtain a Court order requesting the production of business records related

to national security investigations.

In addition, the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 includes a

“lone wolf” provision that expands the definition of “agent of a foreign power” to include a non-

United States person, who acts alone or is believed to be acting alone and who engages in

international terrorism or in activities in preparation therefor. This provision is also scheduled to

sunset at the end of this year, and we ask that it be made permanent as well.

A. Roving Wiretaps

Section 206 of the USA PATRIOT Act extends to FISA the ability to “follow the target”

for purposes of surveillance rather than tie the surveillance to a particular facility and provider

when the target’s actions may have the effect of thwarting that surveillance. In the Attorney

General’s testimony at the beginning of this month before the Senate Judiciary Committee, he

declassified the fact that the FISA court issued 49 orders authorizing the use of roving

surveillance authority under section 206 as of March 30, 2005. Use of roving surveillance has

been available to law enforcement for many years and has been upheld as constitutional by several

federal courts, including the Second, Fifth, and Ninth Circuits. Some object that this provision

gives the FBI discretion to conduct surveillance of persons who are not approved targets of

court-authorized surveillance. This is wrong. Section 206 did not change the requirement that

before approving electronic surveillance, the FISA court must find that there is probable cause to

believe that the target of the surveillance is either a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power,

such as a terrorist or spy. Without section 206, investigators will once again have to struggle to

catch up to sophisticated terrorists trained to constantly change phones in order to avoid

surveillance.

Critics of section 206 also contend that it allows intelligence investigators to conduct

“John Doe” roving surveillance that permits the FBI to wiretap every single phone line, mobile

communications device, or Internet connection the suspect may use without having to identify the

suspect by name. As a result, they fear that the FBI may violate the communications privacy of

innocent Americans. Let me respond to this criticism in the following way. First, even when the

government is unsure of the name of a target of such a wiretap, FISA requires the government to

provide “the identity, if known, or a description of the target of the electronic surveillance” to the

FISA Court prior to obtaining the surveillance order. 50 U.S.C. §§ 1804(a)(3) and

1805(c)(1)(A). As a result, each roving wiretap order is tied to a particular target whom the

FISA Court must find probable cause to believe is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power.

In addition, the FISA Court must find “that the actions of the target of the application may have

the effect of thwarting” the surveillance, thereby requiring an analysis of the activities of a foreign

power or an agent of a foreign power that can be identified or described. 50 U.S.C.

-3-

§ 1805(c)(2)(B). Finally, it is important to remember that FISA has always required that the

government conduct every surveillance pursuant to appropriate minimization procedures that limit

the government’s acquisition, retention, and dissemination of irrelevant communications of

innocent Americans. Both the Attorney General and the FISA Court must approve those

minimization procedures. Taken together, we believe that these provisions adequately protect

against unwarranted governmental intrusions into the privacy of Americans. Section 206 sunsets

at the end of this year.

the target of the application may have

the effect of thwarting” the surveillance, thereby requiring an analysis of the activities of a foreign

power or an agent of a foreign power that can be identified or described. 50 U.S.C.

-3-

§ 1805(c)(2)(B). Finally, it is important to remember that FISA has always required that the

government conduct every surveillance pursuant to appropriate minimization procedures that limit

the government’s acquisition, retention, and dissemination of irrelevant communications of

innocent Americans. Both the Attorney General and the FISA Court must approve those

minimization procedures. Taken together, we believe that these provisions adequately protect

against unwarranted governmental intrusions into the privacy of Americans. Section 206 sunsets

at the end of this year.

B. Authorized Periods for FISA Collection

Section 207 of the USA PATRIOT Act has been essential to protecting the national

security of the United States and protecting the civil liberties of Americans. It changed the time

periods for which electronic surveillance and physical searches are authorized under FISA and, in

doing so, conserved limited OIPR and FBI resources. Instead of devoting time to the mechanics

of repeatedly renewing FISA applications in certain cases -- which are considerable -- those

resources can be devoted instead to other investigative activity as well as conducting appropriate

oversight of the use of intelligence collection authorities by the FBI and other intelligence

agencies. A few examples of how section 207 has helped are set forth below.

Since its inception, FISA has permitted electronic surveillance of an individual who is an

agent of foreign power based upon his status as a non-United States person who acts in the

United States as "an officer or employee of a foreign power, or as a member" of an international

terrorist group. As originally enacted, FISA permitted electronic surveillance of such targets for

initial periods of 90 days, with extensions for additional periods of up to 90 days based upon

subsequent applications by the government. In addition, FISA originally allowed the government

to conduct physical searches of any agent of a foreign power (including United States persons) for

initial periods of 45 days, with extensions for additional 45-day periods.

Section 207 of the USA PATRIOT Act changed the law as to permit the government to

conduct electronic surveillance and physical search of certain agents of foreign powers and nonresident

alien members of international groups for initial periods of 120 days, with extensions for

periods of up to one year. It also allows the government to obtain authorization to conduct a

physical search of any agent of a foreign power for periods of up to 90 days. Section 207 did not

change the time periods applicable for electronic surveillance of United States persons, which

remain at 90 days. By making these time periods equivalent, it has enabled the Department to file

streamlined combined electronic surveillance and physical search applications that, in the past,

were tried but abandoned as too cumbersome to do effectively.

As the Attorney General testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee, we estimate that

the amendments in section 207 have saved OIPR approximately 60,000 hours of attorney time in

the processing of applications. Because of section 207's success, we have proposed additional

amendments to increase the efficiency of the FISA process. Among these would be to allow

coverage of all non-U.S. person agents for foreign powers for 120 days initially with each renewal

-4-

of such authority allowing continued coverage for one year. Had this and other proposals been

included in the USA PATRIOT Act, the Department estimates that an additional 25,000 attorney

hours would have been saved in the interim. Most of these ideas were specifically endorsed in the

recent report of the WMD Commission. The WMD Commission agreed that these changes

would allow the Department to focus its attention where it is most needed and to ensure adequate

attention is given to cases implicating the civil liberties of Americans. Section 207 is scheduled to

sunset at the end of this year.

C. Pen Registers and Trap and Trace Devices

Some of the most useful, and least intrusive, investigative tools available to both

intelligence and law enforcement investigators are pen registers and trap and trace devices.

These devices record data regarding incoming and outgoing communications, such as all of the

telephone numbers that call, or are called by, certain phone numbers associated with a suspected

terrorist or spy. These devices, however, do not record the substantive content of the

communications, such as the words spoken in a telephone conversation. For that reason, the

Supreme Court has held that there is no Fourth Amendment protected privacy interest in

information acquired from telephone calls by a pen register. Nevertheless, information obtained

by pen registers or trap and trace devices can be extremely useful in an investigation by revealing

the nature and extent of the contacts between a subject and his confederates. The data provides

important leads for investigators, and may assist them in building the facts necessary to obtain

probable cause to support a full content wiretap.

Under chapter 206 of title 18, which has been in place since 1986, if an FBI agent and

prosecutor in a criminal investigation of a bank robber or an organized crime figure want to install

and use pen registers or trap and trace devices, the prosecutor must file an application to do so

with a federal court. The application they must file, however, is exceedingly simple: it need only

specify the identity of the applicant and the law enforcement agency conducting the investigation,

as well as “a certification by the applicant that the information likely to be obtained is relevant to

an ongoing criminal investigation being conducted by that agency.” Such applications, of course,

include other information about the facility that will be targeted and details about the

implementation of the collection, as well as “a statement of the offense to which the information

likely to be obtained . . . relates,” but chapter 206 does not require an extended recitation of the

facts of the case.

In contrast, prior to the USA PATRIOT Act, in order for an FBI agent conducting an

intelligence investigation to obtain FISA authority to use the same pen register and trap and trace

device to investigate a spy or a terrorist, the government was required to file a complicated

application under title IV of FISA. Not only was the government’s application required to

include “a certification by the applicant that the information likely to be obtained is relevant to an

ongoing foreign intelligence or international terrorism investigation being conducted by the

Federal Bureau of Investigation under guidelines approved by the Attorney General,” it also had

to include the following:

-5-

information which demonstrates that there is reason to believe that the telephone line to

which the pen register or trap and trace device is to be attached, or the communication

instrument or device to be covered by the pen register or trap and trace device, has been

or is about to be used in communication with––

(A) an individual who is engaging or has engaged in international terrorism or

clandestine intelligence activities that involve or may involve a violation of the

criminal laws of the United States; or

(B) a foreign power or agent of foreign power under circumstances giving reason

to believe that the communication concerns or concerned international terrorism or

clandestine intelligence activities that involve or may involve a violation of the

criminal laws of the United States.

Thus, the government had to make a much different showing in order obtain a pen register

or trap and trace authorization to find out information about a spy or a terrorist than is required to

obtain the very same information about a drug dealer or other ordinary criminal. Sensibly, section

214 of the USA PATRIOT Act simplified the standard that the government must meet in order to

obtain pen/trap data in national security cases. Now, in order to obtain a national security

pen/trap order, the applicant must certify “that the information likely to be obtained is foreign

intelligence information not concerning a United States person, or is relevant to an investigation

to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities.” Importantly, the

law requires that such an investigation of a United States person may not be conducted solely

upon the basis of activities protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution.

Section 214 should not be permitted to expire and return us to the days when it was more

difficult to obtain pen/trap authority in important national security cases than in normal criminal

cases. This is especially true when the law already includes provisions that adequately protect the

civil liberties of Americans. I urge you to re-authorize section 214.

D. Access to Tangible Things

Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act allows the FBI to obtain an order from the FISA

Court requesting production of any tangible thing, such as business records, if the items are

relevant to an ongoing authorized national security investigation, which, in the case of a United

States person, cannot be based solely upon activities protected by the First Amendment to the

Constitution. The Attorney General also declassified earlier this month the fact that the FISA

Court has issued 35 orders requiring the production of tangible things under section 215 from the

date of the effective date of the Act through March 30th of this year. None of those orders was

issued to libraries and/or booksellers, and none was for medical or gun records. The provision to

date has been used only to order the production of driver’s license records, public accommodation

records, apartment leasing records, credit card records, and subscriber information, such as names

and addresses, for telephone numbers captured through court-authorized pen register devices.

-6-

Similar to a prosecutor in a criminal case issuing a grand jury subpoena for an item

relevant to his investigation, so too may the FISA Court issue an order requiring the production

of records or items that are relevant to an investigation to protect against international terrorism

or clandestine intelligence activities. Section 215 orders, however, are subject to judicial

oversight before they are issued – unlike grand jury subpoenas. The FISA Court must explicitly

authorize the use of section 215 to obtain business records before the government may serve the

order on a recipient. In contrast, grand jury subpoenas are subject to judicial review only if they

are challenged by the recipient. Section 215 orders are also subject to the same standard as grand

jury subpoenas – a relevance standard.

Section 215 has been criticized because it does not exempt libraries and booksellers. The

absence of such an exemption is consistent with criminal investigative practice. Prosecutors have

always been able to obtain records from libraries and bookstores through grand jury subpoenas.

Libraries and booksellers should not become safe havens for terrorists and spies. Last year, a

member of a terrorist group closely affiliated with al Qaeda used Internet service provided by a

public library to communicate with his confederates. Furthermore, we know that spies have used

public library computers to do research to further their espionage and to communicate with their

co-conspirators. For example, Brian Regan, a former TRW employee working at the National

Reconnaissance Office, who was convicted of espionage, extensively used computers at five

public libraries in Northern Virginia and Maryland to access addresses for the embassies of certain

foreign governments.

Concerns that section 215 allows the government to target Americans because of the

books they read or websites they visit are misplaced. The provision explicitly prohibits the

government from conducting an investigation of a U.S. person based solely upon protected First

Amendment activity. 50 U.S.C. § 1861(a)(2)(B). However, some criticisms of section 215 have

apparently been based on possible ambiguity in the law. The Department has already stated in

litigation that the recipient of a section 215 order may consult with his attorney and may challenge

that order in court. The Department has also stated that the government may seek, and a court

may require, only the production of records that are relevant to a national security investigation, a

standard similar to the relevance standard that applies to grand jury subpoenas in criminal cases.

The text of section 215, however, is not as clear as it could be in these respects. The Department,

therefore, is willing to support amendments to Section 215 to clarify these points. Section 215

also is scheduled to sunset at the end of this year.

E. The “Wall”

Before the USA PATRIOT Act, applications for orders authorizing electronic surveillance

or physical searches under FISA had to include a certification from a high-ranking Executive

Branch official that “the purpose” of the surveillance or search was to gather foreign intelligence

information. As interpreted by the courts and the Justice Department, this requirement meant that

the “primary purpose” of the collection had to be to obtain foreign intelligence information rather

-7-

than evidence of a crime. Over the years, the prevailing interpretation and implementation of the

“primary purpose” standard had the effect of sharply limiting coordination and information sharing

between intelligence and law enforcement personnel. Because the courts evaluated the

government’s purpose for using FISA at least in part by examining the nature and extent of such

coordination, the more coordination that occurred, the more likely courts would find that law

enforcement, rather than foreign intelligence collection, had become the primary purpose of the

surveillance or search.

During the 1980s, the Department operated under a set of largely unwritten rules that

limited to some degree information sharing between intelligence and law enforcement officials. In

1995, however, the Department established formal procedures that more clearly separated law

enforcement and intelligence investigations and limited the sharing of information between

intelligence and law enforcement personnel even more than the law required. The promulgation

of these procedures was motivated in part by the concern that the use of FISA authorities would

not be allowed to continue in particular investigations if criminal prosecution began to overcome

intelligence gathering as an investigation’s primary purpose. The procedures were intended to

permit a degree of interaction and information sharing between prosecutors and intelligence

officers while at the same time ensuring that the FBI would be able to obtain or continue FISA

coverage and later use the fruits of that coverage in a criminal prosecution. Over time, however,

coordination and information sharing between intelligence and law enforcement personnel became

more limited in practice than was allowed in reality. A perception arose that improper

information sharing could end a career, and a culture developed within the Department sharply

limiting the exchange of information between intelligence and law enforcement officials.

Sections 218 and 504 of the USA PATRIOT Act helped to bring down this “wall”

separating intelligence and law enforcement officials. They erased the perceived statutory

impediment to more robust information sharing between intelligence and law enforcement

personnel. They also provided the necessary impetus for the removal of the formal administrative

restrictions as well as the informal cultural restrictions on information sharing.

Section 218 of the USA PATRIOT Act eliminated the “primary purpose” requirement.

Under section 218, the government may conduct FISA surveillance or searches if foreign

intelligence gathering is a “significant” purpose of the surveillance or search. This eliminated the

need for courts to compare the relative weight of the “foreign intelligence” and “law enforcement”

purposes of the surveillance or search, and allows increased coordination and sharing of

information between intelligence and law enforcement personnel. Section 218 was upheld as

constitutional in 2002 by the FISA court of Review. This change, significantly, did not affect the

government’s obligation to demonstrate that there is probable cause to believe that the target is a

foreign power or an agent of a foreign power. Section 504 – which is not subject to sunset –

buttressed section 218 by specifically amending FISA to allow intelligence officials conducting

FISA surveillances or searches to “consult” with federal law enforcement officials to “coordinate”

efforts to investigate or protect against international terrorism, espionage, and other foreign

threats to national security, and to clarify that such coordination “shall not” preclude the

-8-

certification of a “significant” foreign intelligence purpose or the issuance of an authorization

order by the FISA court.

The Department moved aggressively to implement sections 218 and 504. Following

passage of the Act, the Attorney General adopted new procedures designed to increase

information sharing between intelligence and law enforcement officials, which were affirmed by

the FISA court of Review on November 18, 2002. The Attorney General has also issued other

directives to further enhance information sharing and coordination between intelligence and law

enforcement officials. In practical terms, a prosecutor may now consult freely with the FBI about

what, if any, investigative tools should be used to best prevent terrorist attacks and protect the

national security. Unlike section 504, section 218 is scheduled to sunset at the end of this year.

The increased information sharing facilitated by the USA PATRIOT Act has led to

tangible results in the war against terrorism: plots have been disrupted; terrorists have been

apprehended; and convictions have been obtained in terrorism cases. Information sharing

between intelligence and law enforcement personnel, for example, was critical in successfully

dismantling a terror cell in Portland, Oregon, popularly known as the “Portland Seven,” as well as

a terror cell in Lackawanna, New York. Such information sharing has also been used in the

prosecution of: several persons involved in al Qaeda drugs-for-weapons plot in San Diego, two of

whom have pleaded guilty; nine associates in Northern Virginia of a violent extremist group

known as Lashkar-e-Taiba that has ties to al Qaeda, who were convicted and sentenced to prison

terms ranging from four years to life imprisonment; two Yemeni citizens, Mohammed Ali Hasan

Al-Moayad and Mohshen Yahya Zayed, who were charged and convicted for conspiring to

provide material support to al Qaeda and HAMAS; Khaled Abdel Latif Dumeisi, who was

convicted by a jury in January 2004 of illegally acting as an agent of the former government of

Iraq as well as two counts of perjury; and Enaam Arnaout, the Executive Director of the Illinoisbased

Benevolence International Foundation, who had a long-standing relationship with Osama

Bin Laden and pleaded guilty to a racketeering charge, admitting that he diverted thousands of

dollars from his charity organization to support Islamic militant groups in Bosnia and Chechnya.

Information sharing between intelligence and law enforcement personnel has also been extremely

valuable in a number of other ongoing or otherwise sensitive investigations that we are not at

liberty to discuss today.

While the “wall” primarily hindered the flow of information from intelligence investigators

to law enforcement investigators, another set of barriers, before the passage of the USA

PATRIOT Act, often hampered law enforcement officials from sharing information with

intelligence personnel and others in the government responsible for protecting the national

security. Federal law, for example, was interpreted generally to prohibit federal prosecutors from

disclosing information from grand jury testimony and criminal investigative wiretaps to

intelligence and national defense officials even if that information indicated that terrorists were

planning a future attack, unless such officials were actually assisting with the criminal

investigation. Sections 203(a) and (b) of the USA PATRIOT Act, however, eliminated these

obstacles to information sharing by allowing for the dissemination of that information to assist

Federal law enforcement, intelligence, protective, immigration, national defense, and national

-9-

security officials in the performance of their official duties, even if their duties are unrelated to the

criminal investigation. (Section 203(a) covers grand jury information, and section 203(b) covers

wiretap information.) Section 203(d), likewise, ensures that important information that is

obtained by law enforcement means may be shared with intelligence and other national security

officials. This provision does so by creating a generic exception to any other law purporting to

bar Federal law enforcement, intelligence, immigration, national defense, or national security

officials from receiving, for official use, information regarding foreign intelligence or

counterintelligence obtained as part of a criminal investigation. Indeed, section 905 of the USA

PATRIOT Act requires the Attorney General to expeditiously disclose to the Director of Central

Intelligence foreign intelligence acquired by the Department of Justice in the course of a criminal

investigation unless disclosure of such information would jeopardize an ongoing investigation or

impair other significant law enforcement interests.

The Department has relied on section 203 in disclosing vital information to the intelligence

community and other federal officials on many occasions. Such disclosures, for instance, have

been used to assist in the dismantling of terror cells in Portland, Oregon and Lackawanna, New

York and to support the revocation of suspected terrorists’ visas.

Because two provisions in section 203: sections 203(b) and 203(d) are scheduled to sunset

at the end of the year, we provide below specific examples of the utility of those provisions.

Examples of cases where intelligence information from a criminal investigation was appropriately

shared with the Intelligence Community under Section 203(d) include:

• Information about the organization of a violent jihad training camp including training in

basic military skills, explosives, weapons and plane hijackings, as well as a plot to bomb

soft targets abroad, resulted from the investigation and criminal prosecution of a

naturalized United States citizen who was associated with an al-Qaeda related group;

• Travel information and the manner that monies were channeled to members of a seditious

conspiracy who traveled from the United States to fight alongside the Taliban against U.S.

and allied forces;

• Information about an assassination plot, including the use of false travel documents and

transporting monies to a designated state sponsor of terrorism resulted from the

investigation and prosecution of a naturalized United States citizen who had been the

founder of a well-known United States organization;

• Information about the use of fraudulent travel documents by a high-ranking member of a

designated foreign terrorist organization emanating from his criminal investigation and

prosecution revealed intelligence information about the manner and means of the terrorist

group’s logistical support network which was shared in order to assist in protecting the

lives of U.S. citizens;

-10-

• The criminal prosecution of individuals who traveled to, and participated in, a militarystyle

training camp abroad yielded intelligence information in a number of areas including

details regarding the application forms which permitted attendance at the training camp;

after being convicted, one defendant has testified in a recent separate federal criminal trial

about this application practice, which assisted in the admissibility of the form and

conviction of the defendants; and

• The criminal prosecution of a naturalized U.S. citizen who had traveled to an Al-Qaeda

training camp in Afghanistan revealed information about the group’s practices, logistical

support and targeting information.

Title III information has similarly been shared with the Intelligence Community through section

203(b). The potential utility of such information to the intelligence and national security

communities is obvious: suspects whose conversations are being monitored without their

knowledge may reveal all sorts of information about terrorists, terrorist plots, or other activities

with national security implications. Furthermore, the utility of this provision is not theoretical: the

Department has made disclosures of vital information to the intelligence community and other

federal officials under section 203(b) on many occasions, such as:

• Wiretap interceptions involving a scheme to defraud donors and the Internal Revenue

Service and illegally transfer monies to Iraq generated not only criminal charges but

information concerning the manner and means by which monies were funneled to Iraq; and

• Intercepted communications, in conjunction with a sting operation, led to criminal charges

and intelligence information relating to money laundering, receiving and attempting to

transport night-vision goggles, infrared army lights and other sensitive military equipment

relating to a foreign terrorist organization.

Section 203 is also critical to the operation of the National Counterterrorism Center. The

FBI relies upon section 203(d) to provide information obtained in criminal investigations to

analysts in the new National Counterterrorism Center, thus assisting the Center in carrying out its

vital counterterrorism missions. The National Counterterrorism Center represents a strong

example of section 203 information sharing, as the Center uses information provided by law

enforcement agencies to produce comprehensive terrorism analysis; to add to the list of suspected

terrorists on the TIPOFF watchlist; and to distribute terrorism-related information across the

federal government.

In addition, last year, during a series of high-profile events – the G-8 Summit in Georgia,

the Democratic Convention in Boston and the Republican Convention in New York, the

November 2004 presidential election, and other events – a task force used the information sharing

provisions under Section 203(d) as part and parcel of performing its critical duties. The 2004

Threat Task Force was a successful inter-agency effort where there was a robust sharing of

information at all levels of government.

-11-

the purpose” of the surveillance or search was to gather foreign intelligence

information. As interpreted by the courts and the Justice Department, this requirement meant that

the “primary purpose” of the collection had to be to obtain foreign intelligence information rather

-7-

than evidence of a crime. Over the years, the prevailing interpretation and implementation of the

“primary purpose” standard had the effect of sharply limiting coordination and information sharing

between intelligence and law enforcement personnel. Because the courts evaluated the

government’s purpose for using FISA at least in part by examining the nature and extent of such

coordination, the more coordination that occurred, the more likely courts would find that law

enforcement, rather than foreign intelligence collection, had become the primary purpose of the

surveillance or search.

During the 1980s, the Department operated under a set of largely unwritten rules that

limited to some degree information sharing between intelligence and law enforcement officials. In

1995, however, the Department established formal procedures that more clearly separated law

enforcement and intelligence investigations and limited the sharing of information between

intelligence and law enforcement personnel even more than the law required. The promulgation

of these procedures was motivated in part by the concern that the use of FISA authorities would

not be allowed to continue in particular investigations if criminal prosecution began to overcome

intelligence gathering as an investigation’s primary purpose. The procedures were intended to

permit a degree of interaction and information sharing between prosecutors and intelligence

officers while at the same time ensuring that the FBI would be able to obtain or continue FISA

coverage and later use the fruits of that coverage in a criminal prosecution. Over time, however,

coordination and information sharing between intelligence and law enforcement personnel became

more limited in practice than was allowed in reality. A perception arose that improper

information sharing could end a career, and a culture developed within the Department sharply

limiting the exchange of information between intelligence and law enforcement officials.

Sections 218 and 504 of the USA PATRIOT Act helped to bring down this “wall”

separating intelligence and law enforcement officials. They erased the perceived statutory

impediment to more robust information sharing between intelligence and law enforcement

personnel. They also provided the necessary impetus for the removal of the formal administrative

restrictions as well as the informal cultural restrictions on information sharing.

Section 218 of the USA PATRIOT Act eliminated the “primary purpose” requirement.

Under section 218, the government may conduct FISA surveillance or searches if foreign

intelligence gathering is a “significant” purpose of the surveillance or search. This eliminated the

need for courts to compare the relative weight of the “foreign intelligence” and “law enforcement”

purposes of the surveillance or search, and allows increased coordination and sharing of

information between intelligence and law enforcement personnel. Section 218 was upheld as

constitutional in 2002 by the FISA court of Review. This change, significantly, did not affect the

government’s obligation to demonstrate that there is probable cause to believe that the target is a

foreign power or an agent of a foreign power. Section 504 – which is not subject to sunset –

buttressed section 218 by specifically amending FISA to allow intelligence officials conducting

FISA surveillances or searches to “consult” with federal law enforcement officials to “coordinate”

efforts to investigate or protect against international terrorism, espionage, and other foreign

threats to national security, and to clarify that such coordination “shall not” preclude the

-8-

certification of a “significant” foreign intelligence purpose or the issuance of an authorization

order by the FISA court.

The Department moved aggressively to implement sections 218 and 504. Following

passage of the Act, the Attorney General adopted new procedures designed to increase

information sharing between intelligence and law enforcement officials, which were affirmed by

the FISA court of Review on November 18, 2002. The Attorney General has also issued other

directives to further enhance information sharing and coordination between intelligence and law

enforcement officials. In practical terms, a prosecutor may now consult freely with the FBI about

what, if any, investigative tools should be used to best prevent terrorist attacks and protect the

national security. Unlike section 504, section 218 is scheduled to sunset at the end of this year.

The increased information sharing facilitated by the USA PATRIOT Act has led to

tangible results in the war against terrorism: plots have been disrupted; terrorists have been

apprehended; and convictions have been obtained in terrorism cases. Information sharing

between intelligence and law enforcement personnel, for example, was critical in successfully

dismantling a terror cell in Portland, Oregon, popularly known as the “Portland Seven,” as well as

a terror cell in Lackawanna, New York. Such information sharing has also been used in the

prosecution of: several persons involved in al Qaeda drugs-for-weapons plot in San Diego, two of

whom have pleaded guilty; nine associates in Northern Virginia of a violent extremist group

known as Lashkar-e-Taiba that has ties to al Qaeda, who were convicted and sentenced to prison

terms ranging from four years to life imprisonment; two Yemeni citizens, Mohammed Ali Hasan

Al-Moayad and Mohshen Yahya Zayed, who were charged and convicted for conspiring to

provide material support to al Qaeda and HAMAS; Khaled Abdel Latif Dumeisi, who was

convicted by a jury in January 2004 of illegally acting as an agent of the former government of

Iraq as well as two counts of perjury; and Enaam Arnaout, the Executive Director of the Illinoisbased

Benevolence International Foundation, who had a long-standing relationship with Osama

Bin Laden and pleaded guilty to a racketeering charge, admitting that he diverted thousands of

dollars from his charity organization to support Islamic militant groups in Bosnia and Chechnya.

Information sharing between intelligence and law enforcement personnel has also been extremely

valuable in a number of other ongoing or otherwise sensitive investigations that we are not at

liberty to discuss today.

While the “wall” primarily hindered the flow of information from intelligence investigators

to law enforcement investigators, another set of barriers, before the passage of the USA

PATRIOT Act, often hampered law enforcement officials from sharing information with

intelligence personnel and others in the government responsible for protecting the national

security. Federal law, for example, was interpreted generally to prohibit federal prosecutors from

disclosing information from grand jury testimony and criminal investigative wiretaps to

intelligence and national defense officials even if that information indicated that terrorists were

planning a future attack, unless such officials were actually assisting with the criminal

investigation. Sections 203(a) and (b) of the USA PATRIOT Act, however, eliminated these

obstacles to information sharing by allowing for the dissemination of that information to assist

Federal law enforcement, intelligence, protective, immigration, national defense, and national

-9-

security officials in the performance of their official duties, even if their duties are unrelated to the

criminal investigation. (Section 203(a) covers grand jury information, and section 203(b) covers

wiretap information.) Section 203(d), likewise, ensures that important information that is

obtained by law enforcement means may be shared with intelligence and other national security

officials. This provision does so by creating a generic exception to any other law purporting to

bar Federal law enforcement, intelligence, immigration, national defense, or national security

officials from receiving, for official use, information regarding foreign intelligence or

counterintelligence obtained as part of a criminal investigation. Indeed, section 905 of the USA

PATRIOT Act requires the Attorney General to expeditiously disclose to the Director of Central

Intelligence foreign intelligence acquired by the Department of Justice in the course of a criminal

investigation unless disclosure of such information would jeopardize an ongoing investigation or

impair other significant law enforcement interests.

The Department has relied on section 203 in disclosing vital information to the intelligence

community and other federal officials on many occasions. Such disclosures, for instance, have

been used to assist in the dismantling of terror cells in Portland, Oregon and Lackawanna, New

York and to support the revocation of suspected terrorists’ visas.

Because two provisions in section 203: sections 203(b) and 203(d) are scheduled to sunset

at the end of the year, we provide below specific examples of the utility of those provisions.

Examples of cases where intelligence information from a criminal investigation was appropriately

shared with the Intelligence Community under Section 203(d) include:

• Information about the organization of a violent jihad training camp including training in

basic military skills, explosives, weapons and plane hijackings, as well as a plot to bomb

soft targets abroad, resulted from the investigation and criminal prosecution of a

naturalized United States citizen who was associated with an al-Qaeda related group;

• Travel information and the manner that monies were channeled to members of a seditious

conspiracy who traveled from the United States to fight alongside the Taliban against U.S.

and allied forces;

• Information about an assassination plot, including the use of false travel documents and

transporting monies to a designated state sponsor of terrorism resulted from the

investigation and prosecution of a naturalized United States citizen who had been the

founder of a well-known United States organization;

• Information about the use of fraudulent travel documents by a high-ranking member of a

designated foreign terrorist organization emanating from his criminal investigation and

prosecution revealed intelligence information about the manner and means of the terrorist

group’s logistical support network which was shared in order to assist in protecting the

lives of U.S. citizens;

-10-

• The criminal prosecution of individuals who traveled to, and participated in, a militarystyle

training camp abroad yielded intelligence information in a number of areas including

details regarding the application forms which permitted attendance at the training camp;

after being convicted, one defendant has testified in a recent separate federal criminal trial

about this application practice, which assisted in the admissibility of the form and

conviction of the defendants; and

• The criminal prosecution of a naturalized U.S. citizen who had traveled to an Al-Qaeda

training camp in Afghanistan revealed information about the group’s practices, logistical

support and targeting information.

Title III information has similarly been shared with the Intelligence Community through section

203(b). The potential utility of such information to the intelligence and national security

communities is obvious: suspects whose conversations are being monitored without their

knowledge may reveal all sorts of information about terrorists, terrorist plots, or other activities

with national security implications. Furthermore, the utility of this provision is not theoretical: the

Department has made disclosures of vital information to the intelligence community and other

federal officials under section 203(b) on many occasions, such as:

• Wiretap interceptions involving a scheme to defraud donors and the Internal Revenue

Service and illegally transfer monies to Iraq generated not only criminal charges but

information concerning the manner and means by which monies were funneled to Iraq; and

• Intercepted communications, in conjunction with a sting operation, led to criminal charges

and intelligence information relating to money laundering, receiving and attempting to

transport night-vision goggles, infrared army lights and other sensitive military equipment

relating to a foreign terrorist organization.

Section 203 is also critical to the operation of the National Counterterrorism Center. The

FBI relies upon section 203(d) to provide information obtained in criminal investigations to

analysts in the new National Counterterrorism Center, thus assisting the Center in carrying out its

vital counterterrorism missions. The National Counterterrorism Center represents a strong

example of section 203 information sharing, as the Center uses information provided by law

enforcement agencies to produce comprehensive terrorism analysis; to add to the list of suspected

terrorists on the TIPOFF watchlist; and to distribute terrorism-related information across the

federal government.

In addition, last year, during a series of high-profile events – the G-8 Summit in Georgia,

the Democratic Convention in Boston and the Republican Convention in New York, the

November 2004 presidential election, and other events – a task force used the information sharing

provisions under Section 203(d) as part and parcel of performing its critical duties. The 2004

Threat Task Force was a successful inter-agency effort where there was a robust sharing of

information at all levels of government.

[AikidoSoul]

272. As I explained, putting you on IGNORE would give the impression

that I agreed with you if I didn't at least object to your distorted views.

Silence is often interpreted as "agreement".

That sure won't happen.....

[AikidoSoul]

273. Here a link to the FBI's website describing their foreign intelligence activities

entitled "Foreign Counterintelligence Stories"

Have fun. Try to read it and assimilate its meaning.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/story-index/foreign-counterintelligence

[AikidoSoul]

274. In plain English, in the body of this text, it mentions the FBI's foreign intelligence activities

From the Dept. of Homeland Security entitled "FBI Field Intelligence Groups and Fusion Centers"

http://www.dhs.gov/fbi-field-intelligence-groups-and-fusion-centers

Field Intelligence Groups

FIGs are located in each of the FBI's 56 field offices and are staffed with FBI intelligence analysts, language analysts, and special agents. FIGs are the primary mechanism through which FBI field offices develop human intelligence, identify emerging trends, identify, evaluate, and prioritize threats within their areas of responsibility, and support domain awareness and investigative efforts through the use of strategic and tactical analysis, linguists, subject matter experts, special operations groups and specialized surveillance groups. FIGs have established processes for collecting, analyzing producing and disseminating intelligence information, while contributing to the enterprise-wide understanding of the current threat environment. These processes enhance the FBI's ability to successfully penetrate national and transnational criminal networks, terrorist organizations, foreign intelligence services, and other entities that seek to harm the United States.

FIGs analyze and disseminate information to the IC and other federal, state, local and tribal agencies as well as foreign counterparts. Utilizing dissemination protocols, FIGs contribute to local and regional perspectives on all threats, and serve as the FBI's primary intelligence link with fusion centers, the IC, and Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs).

If you keep up your studying stevenleser you may be able to get work towards getting a degree based on your knowledge of FBI foreign intelligence activities. Or maybe you can even get a job with the FBI, if you don't already have one!

[stevenleser]

358. That is not what that is saying. It is saying in the pursuit of domestic law enforcement the FBI

liaises with foreign intelligence agencies. Not that the FBI performs foreign intelligence.

The FBI does not do that work.

Try talking about stuff you actually know about. Here is another hint in the disparity of knowledge between us. Just yesterday I was sitting next to a former CIA Agent while we were on a radio show discussing Hillary's emails. Afterwards we had a good discussion about intelligence work.

I had a senior member of the FBI on my radio show to discuss interrogation. I talk to these folks. When was the last time you talked to CIA or FBI folks?

Admit it, you have no idea what you are talking about here.

[AikidoSoul]

359. You are such a vacuous mind. Mincing words is your skill

So everybody else is doing the intelligence work for the FBI in those foreign field offices?


BWAAAHAAAAHHAAAA

[stevenleser]

360. Once again, I've talked to CIA Agents and FBI Agents. When have you done so?

More to the point, what things do you actually know about? You should discuss those things.

[AikidoSoul]

361. I see the CIA's and FBI's own published material. You have to be an idiot not to understand

what it means.

Plus the plethora of information and news internationally.

Who made that up?

If you're trying to bait me into admitting who I know in the intelligence agencies -- it won't work.

[stevenleser]

362. And you are completely misinterpreting what you are reading. I have to ask...

... is English your first language? Because you are not comprehending what you are reading.

Baiting you with trying to know whether you know what you are talking about or not? Either you have spoken to folks in the business of what you are trying to assert knowledge of or you haven't.

I've spoken to these folks. I know what the FBI does and what the CIA does by talking to folks who have actually worked in those agencies. You are misinterpreting what you are reading on a website.

It's that simple.

[AikidoSoul]

409. Retired US Intelligence Officers See Benefits of WikiLeaks Truth-telling

From the Institute for Public Accuracy - (Reliable, independent sources for breaking news)


http://www.accuracy.org/release/2404-ex-intelligence-officers-others-see-plusses-in-wikileaks-disclosures/

Ex-Intelligence Officers, Others See Plusses in WikiLeaks Disclosures - December 7, 2010


BIG SNIP --LONG ARTICLE

So far, the question of whether Americans can “handle the truth” has been an academic rather than an experience-based one, because Americans have had very little access to the truth. Now, however, with the WikiLeaks disclosures, they do. Indeed, the classified messages from the Army and the State Department released by WikiLeaks are, quite literally, “ground truth.”

How to inform American citizens? As a step in that direction, on October 23 we “Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence” (see below) presented our annual award for integrity to Julian Assange. He accepted the honor “on behalf of our sources, without which WikiLeaks’ contributions are of no significance.” In presenting the award, we noted that many around the world are deeply indebted to truth-tellers like WikiLeaks and its sources.

Here is a brief footnote: Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence (SAAII) is a group of former CIA colleagues and other admirers of former intelligence analyst Sam Adams, who hold up his example as a model for those who would aspire to the courage to speak truth to power. (For more, please see: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/10/24-8 .)

Sam did speak truth to power on Vietnam, and in honoring his memory, SAAII confers an award each year to a truth-teller exemplifying Sam Adams’ courage, persistence, and devotion to truth — no matter the consequences. Previous recipients include:

-Coleen Rowley of the FBI
-Katharine Gun of British Intelligence
-Sibel Edmonds of the FBI
-Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan
-Sam Provance, former Sgt., US Army
-Frank Grevil, Maj., Danish Army Intelligence
-Larry Wilkerson, Col., US Army (ret.)
-Julian Assange, WikiLeaks

“There is nothing concealed that will not be revealed, nothing hidden that will not be made known. Everything you have said in the dark will be heard in the daylight; what you have whispered in locked rooms will be proclaimed from the rooftops.”
— Luke 12:2-3

The following former awardees and other associates have signed the above statement; some are available for interviews:

DANIEL ELLSBERG
A former government analyst, Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers, a secret government history of the Vietnam War to the New York Times and other newspapers in 1971. He was an admirer of Sam Adams when they were both working on Vietnam and in March 1968 disclosed to the New York Times some of Adams’ accurate analysis, helping head off reinforcement of 206,000 additional troops into South Vietnam and a widening of the war at that time to neighboring countries.

FRANK GREVIL
Grevil, a former Danish intelligence analyst, was imprisoned for giving the Danish press documents showing that Denmark’s Prime Minister (now NATO Secretary General) disregarded warnings that there was no authentic evidence of WMD in Iraq; in Copenhagen, Denmark.

KATHARINE GUN
Gun is a former British government employee who faced two years imprisonment in England for leaking a U.S. intelligence memo before the invasion of Iraq. The memo indicated that the U.S. had mounted a spying “surge” against U.N. Security Council delegations in early 2003 in an effort to win approval for an Iraq war resolution. The leaked memo — published by the British newspaper The Observer on March 2, 2003 — was big news in parts of the world, but almost ignored in the United States. The U.S. government then failed to obtain a U.N. resolution approving war, but still proceeded with the invasion.

DAVID MacMICHAEL, [phone], [e-mail]
MacMichael is a former CIA analyst. He resigned in the 1980s when he came to the conclusion that the CIA was slanting intelligence on Central America for political reasons. He is a member of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.

RAY McGOVERN
McGovern was a CIA analyst for 27 years, whose duties included preparing and briefing the President’s Daily Brief and chairing National Intelligence Estimates. He is on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.

CRAIG MURRAY
Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, was fired from his job when he objected to Uzbeks being tortured to gain “intelligence” on “terrorists.” Upon receiving his Sam Adams award, Murray said, “I would rather die than let someone be tortured in an attempt to give me some increment of security.” Observers have noted that Murray was subjected to similar character assassination techniques as Julian Assange is now encountering to discredit him.

COLEEN ROWLEY
Rowley, a former FBI Special Agent and Division Counsel whose May 2002 memo described some of the FBI’s pre-9/11 failures, was named one of Time Magazine’s “Persons of the Year” in 2002. She recently co-wrote a Los Angeles Times op-ed titled, “WikiLeaks and 9/11: What if? Frustrated investigators might have chosen to leak information that their superiors bottled up, perhaps averting the terrorism attacks.”

LARRY WILKERSON
Wilkerson, Col., U.S. Army (ret.), former chief of staff to Secretary Colin Powell at the State Department, who criticized what he called the “Cheney-Rumsfeld cabal.” See recent interviews

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, [phone]; or David Zupan, [phone]

[reorg]

59. the former are using the latter n/t

[randome]

69. You want to believe that, I'm sure, because it elevates The Great Hero in your eyes.

I'm not sure how much longer you can keep juggling concepts to maintain his infallibility. He's already admitted to the acts that Sweden wants to charge him with. He simply thinks he's above that sort of thing because...well, because.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[reorg]

81. 'infallibility'?

He had been warned, even here on DU we had already discussed and posted the link to the CIA document outlining plans to discredit Wikileaks. No, I think he could have been more careful, but then again he may just be a more trusting person than I am.

[hifiguy]

86. Your laugable presumption that Assange is some Great Hero

to his defenders is laughable. I know little about the man but very much admire his bravery and willingness to expose very powerful people as masters of war and torture by using their own words. That much is highly commendable.

[AikidoSoul]

174. So what? He admitted to having consensual sex.

You really are an irritant. You are twisting the facts to make your case but I gotta tell you that you are simply a worm on the fabric of Truth.

To me Assange is a hero. He took a huge risk in releasing information THAT ALL OF US should have been privy to.

Next why don't you give us your explanation of why our government should keep the new trade agreement secret, and not let the public or even many of the COTUS members read it!!

Assange...... where are you? Release the language of the trade agreement!!!

[msanthrope]

185. How does a sleeping woman consent to sex? nt

[stevenleser]

204. Well, you see, rules are different for the sacred cows like Assange, Sanders and Greenwald.

In fact, there are no rules for them. They can do anything they want and are above criticism and the law.

[msanthrope]

205. the authoritarian mindset that protects the privilege of these white men

Is utterly astounding. That one cannot contemplate that it's entirely possible for a man to both release cables and rate is mystifying.

[hifiguy]

246. Jesus, you are incredibly single-minded and dumber than a box of hair.

There is institutional evil in the world and it always seeks to protect itself.

Who is Assange against the CIA or MI6"

I laugh.

[msanthrope]

249. I am "dumber than a box of hair?" What an interesting insult. And yet....you still can't

answer the poster who is dumber than a box of hair when asked for proof of your various wild theories.

I do find the reflexive protection of white men against allegations of sexual misconduct to be the height of authoritarianism..... the ultimate protection of the status quo. all oppressive governments share a common trait in their trivialisation of rape and sexual assault.

[struggle4progress]

253. I suspect it just means a box of hair never disagreed with him,

which shows ... um ... y'know ... that a box of hair ... uh ... must be smart

[msanthrope]

270. I think the incredible responses that protect the privilege of this particular white man to rape

have been stunning.....

Here, a sexual assault survivor gets to be told that she is dumber than a box of hair for pointing out that supposedly liberal men can rape, too.

[AikidoSoul]

218. He was in bed with her. She was there beside him.

Allowing him to stay in her apartment and sleep in her bed speaks volumes. Don'cha think?

Haven't you ever heard of nudging your sleeping partner to get things going?

BOTH of the women he had sex with while in Sweden DENIED that he raped them. And the one he stayed with at her apartment, denied that she slept through the sexual encounter.

Sweden has different laws than here in the US. In Sweden rape is under what is known as PUBLIC PROSECUTION LAW. Officials don't need the "victim's" consent to do an investigation or to prosecute.

Assange had no idea he was being accused of rape. He read the allegation in the newspapers.

The prosecutor dropped the case but a woman lawyer pressed them to re-open it. Reasons were not published as to her motives or the influence that triggered her actions.

On September 27th Assange left Sweden and immdiately afterwards the prosecutor issued a warrant for his arrest.

[AikidoSoul]

236. You are a hopeless case in my opinion

and I suspect that you don't read very much.

I'm not sure you can be educated to understand how widespread attacks are on activists and dissidents.

How could you even miss the history of thousands of people who have suffered horrible abuse for exposing the truth and trying to make the world a better place for all of us?

Don't you think that the truth is important in a real Democracy.... or anywhere else for that matter?

Would you risk everything to expose the truth so others could live a better life? Maybe even your own family?

I don't get why you are so stubbornly obtuse... unless it's an unrelenting ego that just can't let go of the narrow picture you have of our polticial situation.

It's a shame really.

Now DO GO AND GET SOME VERY DEEP AND LONG SLEEP AS YOU SEEM TO THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT ACCORDING TO YOU SIG LINE. Wake up in about ten years when you reach the age of maturity.

[AikidoSoul]

427. WikiLeaks didn't "disown him" -- as usual you are pissing in the thorny wind

And there is no WikiLeaks public statement that makes your case.

Oh dear. Are you getting tired of being beaten down with a truthstick?

But here is something interesting for your narrow gullet:

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/groundtruth/vaughan-smith-julian-assange

A bold stand in support: Vaughan Smith on Julian Assange

SNIP

Outside the Ecuadorian Embassy a gaggle of supporters of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange are clustered under umbrellas and tucked in doorways trying to stay dry. Their placards, laminated against the rain, state their case: “Free Assange” and “Asylum for Assange. No to Rendition.” One that reads “Freedom of Expression is a Right” is handwritten in black ink and the words run like tear-stained mascara down a white cardboard poster in a steady downpour.

An armed Scotland Yard officer in uniform is posted at the entrance of the Embassy. Several more police hover on the fringes and in unmarked cars on the narrow street known as Hans Crescent just across the entrance from Harrods. The streets are packed with tourists and shoppers on Friday afternoon in the run up to the Olympics, but few take notice of this little stand-off between the protesters and the British government’s attempts to extradite Assange to Sweden where he still faces allegations of sex-related offenses.

SNIP

The United States views Assange’s role in the leak of the documents as a crime and many observers consider it likely that U.S. prosecutors will seek to bring charges in connection with their publication.
Assange’s political asylum case is built on a fear that if he is extradited to Sweden that he will end up being extradited to the U.S. where he could potentially face serious, criminal charges. Many prominent international and American figures have supported his asylum bid, from Oliver Stone and Michael Moore to Daniel Ellsberg of the Pentagon Papers.

SNIP

But earlier, I spent some time with Vaughan Smith, the founder of the Frontline Club, who has stood by Assange for nearly two years through his odyssey in the limelight and his legal ordeal. Smith’s Frontline Club is a gathering place for journalists near Paddington which has become home base in London for many of the world’s foreign correspondents (including this one). Smith has taken some heat for his support of Assange. Some journalists have disagreed with Smith’s assertion that Assange has as much right to be a member of the Frontline club as any other self-proclaimed journalist. Assange is in the business of digging for information and publishing it, and for Smith it is really that simple.

SNIP

[AikidoSoul]

142. I believe you completely. I saw many activist targeted including myself

Last edited Fri Aug 14, 2015, 11:04 PM - Edit history (1)

I've been an activist in different areas for a long time. Bad things have happened to me and to fellow activists.

I have friends who were targeted and one I strongly suspect -- was murdered. That would be Nicolas Regush, former investigative medical/scientific reporter for ABC News with Peter Jennings.

Regush left ABC News in disgust after more than ten years because the network refused to report on toxic injury which he knew to be a huge issue. He started his own magazine in Canada called Red Flags Weekly, which then became Red Flags Daily.

I was his consultant on toxic injury and we spoke via phone several times a week. He suddenly died of a heart attack just prior to convening an international conference in New York City regarding toxic injury. Scientists and physicians from all over the world planned to attend. His death was never investigated... at least not to my knowledge, but he was young and vigorous. I think he was killed by something that can cause a massive heart attack.

Then there was my dear friend James I. Moss who was targeted and his job eliminated. He testified before the Rockefeller (ironic) committee on Gulf War Illness and published his research findings which Johnson and Johnson did not like. They funded the dept. at the Univ. of FL USDA research office where he worked .... and he was bye, bye immediately afterwards.

I was targeted and most likely was poisoned over a period of several months when I started the national Ross Perot for President movement in Key West. So many strange things happened during that year and I knew in my heart and soul that there was no way that they could be an accident or coincidence.

My friend Omar Shafey, MD, who was the epidemiologist for the State of Florida who was targeted and fired for his report on Malathion poisonings in Florida. The pressure came from the top guy at the FL Dept. of "Health", Secretary Robert Brooks -- appointed by Jeb Bush in early 1999. But the dirty work was done by Rick Hunter who at the time was the Deputy State Health Officer and #2 in charge of daily operations, (very slick political operator behind good ole boy Oklahoma image, protects Brooks from direct liability. Hunter rose up through the Division of Environmental Health).

Zane Kime, M.D., of Auburn, CA., was most likely murdered on a mountain climbing trip with someone who disappeared after the death. Kime was doing work that dealt with toxic injury.

Marion Moses, MD, of San Francisco, also a toxic injury expert, was repeatedly threatened as was Janette Sherman, MD, who had the same type of expertise.

And many, many other activists have suffered terrible things.

I believe you because I have direct experiences that have caused suffering and anger. And I have many dear friends who have suffered terribly because like me, and you, they were trying to make the world a better place to live in.

[elias49]

152. Thank you for this. It takes courage.

But ignorance is a powerful master, and won't mean a thing to those here who sheepishly sing America the Awesome!

[Rex]

7. That one is so amusing, it is like they take it personally or something.

I've LOL'd for months at that particular poster. Backed them into a corner so many times now in a thread, that I've lost count.

It eats some up to no end that the leaks exposed the NSA just as people thought it was - breaking the law and spying domestically on all U.S. taxpayers. The cat is out of the bag and it makes them foaming at the mouth mad that they cannot just pretend it never happened and that everyone else won't go along with it.

Which is what makes it so amusing to watch!

[hifiguy]

9. Trying to educate some of the people around here

is like trying to hammer a strand of cooked spaghetti into a brick of metallized hydrogen.

There are many around here who are as fact-free and blinded by their own narrative as any reichwinger. Sad, actually.

[Live and Learn]

277. +1 nt

[elias49]

147. If no-one gives a shit, why do you always show up

crying "This is bullshit!"
Assange is nothing to you. Let it go. For your health.

[AikidoSoul]

213. You say that Assange "is nothing but another George Zimmerman"?????!!!!!

Good God. You post is filled with absolutist statements. You said several things demonstrating that you would nullify Assange's significance.

Absolutist statements are often serious errors in judgment because in reality there is no black and white world that is so simple as the one created by absolutists.

Absolutists are often dogmatic people who lack critical thinking skills, and are incapable, or perhaps lacking the energy to look deeply into a complex topic, recognize its complexity, and then describe it using language that is complex.

Absolutists also tend to be anti-intellectual.

In psychology this type of absolutist "thinking" can lead to depression because absolutist, negative thinking can lead to entrenched distortions in perception and information processing. People diagnosed with this problem are seen as having distinct cognitive biases. This problem greatly limits insight.



I don't know how old you are, but am hoping you are maybe fourteen? That would give us some hope that change can happen!

[randome]

225. And you reflexively nullify the women who want him tested.

Because he's your hero. A hero who runs and hides, betrays the friends who put up his bail. Who tried to foist an edited video on the public. Who said informants deserve whatever happens to them. Who let Chelsea Manning twist in the wind.

This is your hero? He's a narcissistic coward, IMO. No one should be above the law. Even The Cowardly Assange.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[AikidoSoul]

279. You are misrepresenting Assange. Thank heavens you're not his attorney

Your sig line is so perfect:

"The truth doesn’t always set you free. Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in."

BWAAAHAAAA! That is just perfect -- I couldn't have done a better job of describing your situation...

You can't be so out of touch with international accounts on Assange to ignore the many reports that the United States wants to extradite him to the US so they can "handle him."

Assange has repeatedly said that he doesn't want to go back to Sweden for that reason.

I already posted the fact (cited in the Swedish legal documents) that the Swedish prosecutor refused to interview him while he was in Sweden right after the accusations were made against him....which when documented on paper, the two women refused to sign. The women only want him tested. for VD... and even an idiot knows that can be done in any decent medical facility anywhere in the world. In that same Swedish legal document there legal minds who are adamant that the prosceutor was unfair to Assange, not only for not interviewing him while he was in Sweden, but for refusing to have him interviewed in England, which is where he landed after leaving Sweden.

An excerpt from the British Guardian Newspaper:

Assange has always claimed he is innocent and that he would be prepared to face a Swedish court were it not for a threat that he would be extradited to the US for political crimes. Neither the US nor Swedish governments have responded to his requests for guarantees.

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/nov/20/julian-assange-appeal-arrest-warrant-swedish-court

Some think you continue to act dense and write bogus things about Assange just to poison this thread. I have the stamina to debate you on the facts, but realize that it's not something that you want. But, I'm hopeful that if you have a few neurons that still can communicate with other neurons, along with even a tiny hint of an honest bone in your body, that it will grow bigger.... and stronger! But oh hell, if you don't change I hope the damned bone explodes and fries your computer!

[AikidoSoul]

310. But, but...but... Carl Rove cares very much what happens to Julian Assange!!!!

For those of you who continue to have your doubts about ASSANGE being targeted for ruin by powerful politicians dedicated to serve the interests the 1/10% ENTER CARL ROVE into the scene to plot for Assange's demise......

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-kreig/rove-suspected-in-swedish_b_798737.html

Rove Suspected In Swedish-U.S. Political Prosecution of WikiLeaks

Karl Rove's help for Sweden as it assists the Obama administration's prosecution against WikiLeaks could be the latest example of the adage, "Politics makes strange bedfellows."

Rove has advised Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt for the past two years after resigning as Bush White House political advisor in mid-2007. Rove's resignation followed the scandalous Bush mid-term political purge of nine of the nation's 93 powerful U.S. attorneys.

These days, Sweden and the United States are apparently undertaking a political prosecution as audacious and important as those by the notorious "loyal Bushies" earlier this decade against U.S. Democrats.

The U.S. prosecution of WikiLeaks, if successful, could criminalize many kinds of investigative news reporting about government affairs, not just the WikiLeaks disclosures that are embarrassing Sweden as well as the Bush and Obama administrations. Authorities in both countries are setting the stage with pre-indictment sex and spy smears against WikiLeaks leader Julian Assange, plus an Interpol manhunt. (See the rest of this story of trickery by the Rove crew at the link).

"This all has Karl's signature," a reliable political source told me a week and a half ago in encouraging our Justice and Integrity Project investigate Rove's Swedish connection. "He must be very happy. He's right back in the middle of it. He's making himself valuable to his new friends, seeing the U.S. government doing just what he'd like ─ and screwing his opponents big-time."

SNIP

And here's an excerpt of a story by Naomi Wolf which gets into the blood and guts of the story and shows you how dirty the players can be.... this is about rendition and torture arranged by Thomas Bodstrom, the lawyer against Assage, and former Swedish "Minister of Justice" who helped approve a CIA rendition to enable the CIA to fly two asylum seekers into Egypt where they were tortured:

Dr. Brian Palmer, a social anthropologist at Uppsala University, explained on Kreig’s radio show last month that Karl Rove has been working directly as an advisor to the governing Moderate Party. Kreig also reported, in Connecticut Watchdog, that the Assange accusers’ lawyer is a partner in the law firm Borgström and Bodström, whose other name partner, Thomas Bodström, is a former Swedish Minister of Justice. In that office, Bodström helped approve a 2001 CIA rendition request to Sweden, to allow the CIA to fly two asylum-seekers from Sweden to Egypt, where they were tortured. This background compels us to review the case against Assange with extreme care.

SNIP SEE LINK FOR MORE BELOW

http://markcrispinmiller.com/2011/02/eight-big-problems-with-the-case-against-assange-must-read-by-naomi-wolf/

[muriel_volestrangler]

10. Nonsense, twaddle and utter foolishness.

You claim the rape accusation is 'completely phony'. You base that on your admiration for Assange's political work, rather than any thought about rape.

[hifiguy]

17. I base it on a knowledge of how intelligence agencies

have an immeasurably long history of targeting persons who dissent and expose things governments want known and how they work. Denial of that fact is not possible.

Please don't presume anything outside of the very clear words I wrote in the OP. That is disingenuous and beneath you.

[muriel_volestrangler]

19. Your words were indeed clear; they are an awful example of misogyny

that I'm ashamed to see on DU. You dismiss what the woman says, because of your admiration of Assange.

[hifiguy]

20. BS. Women couldn't be blackmailed or bribed by a spy agency?

Most human beings can be bribed, pressured, or blackmailed into doing something if enough force is brought to bear, and bringing force to bear is what spooks do. Tokyo Rose was one such example ofsomeone pressured to engage in propaganda. It's the reason they exist.

Women have even been known to cooperate with spy agencies willingly throughout history.

Facts are what they are.

[msanthrope]

22. but of course you've offered no evidence of these women were. In T

[hifiguy]

24. This really isn't about them as people.

My view is that they were most likely used as pawns by some nation's intelligence agency - Sweden's probably. You are aware of the things intelligence agencies have been doing to persons who are a perceived threat for the last couple of hundred years, aren't you? It has been in the papers.

Similar tactics were used against Martin Luther King. Not comparing the two men, but both were perceived as serious threats by TPTB, and the methods deployed against both are as old as the world.

Why is what I am arguing for so difficult to consider? Intelligence agencies engage in dirty and morally reprehensible activities all the time. Is that surprising to you?

[msanthrope]

27. that's how you view victims of sexual assault? Pawns?

Assange has already admitted to doing the acts described in the warrant. his defense was that those axe were not crimes in great britain. , he was wrong.

[reorg]

41. You are lying again

Assange has never 'admitted' the slanderous allegations in the warrant.

[msanthrope]

55. I can't make you read the trial court documents.....

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110224-Britain-Ruling-Assange-Extradition-to-Sweden.pdf

[reorg]

63. I read them before you and that's how I know you are lying n/t

[AikidoSoul]

230. reorg.... here is an excerpt from the Assange legal case that proves Misanthrope is lying again.

This excerpt comes directly from the pdf legal file provided regarding the Assange legal case in Sweden. PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS A LEGAL CASE WITH INTERNATIONAL RAMIFICATIONS. THE LANGUAGE OF THIS VERY SHORT EXCERPT SHOULD PROVE EXACTLY HOW UNFAIR AND CONTROVERSIAL THIS CASE IS, EVEN AS DESCRIBED BY SWEDISH LEGAL MINDS. YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO GO TO THE ENTIRE STORY AT THIS URL FOR THE MORE COMPLETE LEGAL OPINION -- LINK:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110224-Britain-Ruling-Assange-Extradition-to-Sweden.pdf

"The police interviews with the complainants do not follow good practice. The complainants and the interviewing officer are all active members of the Social Democrat Party. He also explained the difficulty in Sweden demonstrating the difference between consenting to something and wanting something. He told me that the police file in this case had been publicly available on the Internet. It was suggested to him that the material he saw on 31st January was a copy of the material sent to Mr Assange, but leaked after it reached the office of his London lawyer, and he appeared to agree.

Sven-Eric Alhem gave evidence the next day, 8th February. He too adopted his expert report and his evidence has been transcribed and need not be repeated in detail here. Mr Alhem retired in July 2008 after a legal career as a prosecutor, including serving as the Chief District Prosecutor in Stockholm and later as Director for the Regional Prosecution Authority in Stockholm. Since 2008 he has seen himself primarily as a social commentator on legal matters. He was concerned that the proper procedures had not been followed in Mr Assange’s case in Sweden. The prosecution should not have confirmed to the media that Mr Asange was considered a likely suspect of rape. That disclosure was unlawful. He was surprised that this defendant had not been detained in custody pending the investigation into the rape allegation. In his view good prosecution practice requires a very early interview with the suspect. It is an imperative for the accused to have the opportunity to respond to the accusations at the earliest possible time when he still remembers the intimate details. Thus it was quite wrong, in his view, for the prosecutor Ms Ny to decline the opportunity to interview Mr Assange. He believed that to issue the European Arrest Warrant without having first tried to arrange an interrogation in England at the earliest possible time via a request for Mutual Assistance offended against the principle of proportionality. A prosecutor should not seek to arrest and extradite Mr Assange simply for the purposes of questioning as long as other means have not been tried, or have been tried and failed. The defendant is not accused: he is a suspect. He has not been indicted. He was taken to section 18 of the Swedish Appeal Code (page 58). The golden rule is that a party should be heard. Until then he should not be prosecuted. The last thing that happens in a preliminary investigation is that the suspect has the right to see all material and the opportunity to comment. He said that rape trials in Sweden are normally heard privately. He believes it is necessary to balance the integrity of the injured party against the principle of openness. Both parties might think it is a good thing that the whole trial is heard behind closed doors.

In cross-examination he said his understanding of the steps taken to interview Mr Assange comes from what he was told by Mr Hurtig, the Swedish defence lawyer, and what he has read. [In his proof Mr Alhem said that “according to the information given to me, Prosecutor Ny declined the opportunity to interview Mr Assange after she took over the case on 1st September, despite the fact he remained in Sweden until 27th September 2010 … I understand that the prosecutor declined the offer to meet for an interview simply because the police officer at the time was sick … it is catastrophic that so much time has passed without a very detailed interrogation having taken place.”] He had not read the documentation put before the Stockholm District Court and the Court of Appeal. He had not seen the statements of Mr Hurtig or Ms Ny. The account given by Ms Ny as to the factual steps taken to interview Mr Assange were put to him. “I make no judgement between Mr Hurtig and Ms Ny.” He added that he saw his role as giving a judgement on the ECHR, the legal issues and fairness. There is nothing wrong with the EAW issued for Mr Assange. If it was the case that it was not possible to hold the interrogation hearing with the suspect earlier then he too, when he was a prosecutor, would have issued the EAW. However he would have first tried to arrange the interrogation hearing in another way. He agreed that the evidential question as to the steps taken to interview Mr Assange is relevant and that he should have seen the relevant documentation before expressing his view. However even if Ms Ny’s account, which he heard in court today for the first time, is correct then that does not change his view that an interrogation should have taken place in England. He made it clear that the statement of Ms Ny does not correspond with the information he had been given by Mr Hurtig. Ms Ny “is allowed to seek an EAW – there is no doubt about that”. On the account given by Ms Ny it would have been a reasonable reaction to apply for an EAW. “Certainly, I would have done the same myself”.

It is a decision for the Swedish court whether a defendant is held in custody and if so whether it should be incommunicado. The failure to hold public hearings has not led to appeals to the court of appeal or to Strasbourg, as far as he can remember. Nevertheless it has caused debate.

He was then asked about extradition from Sweden to the United States. He is not an expert on what happens but had brought a Guide and had considered the specialty principle. His reading was that normally there could not be a further surrender to a country outside the European Union but there are exceptions. It would be “completely impossible to extradite Mr Assange to the USA without a media storm”. It is quite right to say that he would not be extradited to the USA.

Overall I was left with the impression of a sincere witness doing his best to help the court. He relied on Mr Hurtig for his information as to the attempts made to interview Mr Assange. His strongest criticism was based on the information that no attempt had been made to interview the suspect while he was still in Sweden. However, even on Ms Ny’s account he was critical of the decision not to arrange an interview in the UK."

[stevenleser]

231. So provide your interpretation of what Assange said. Simple. But you refuse to do so

And I can understand why. Assange essentially admits to everything of which he is being accused.

[AikidoSoul]

235. And I say bullshit to you. My answer to your "request" is contained in post 230

Did you (facetiously?) ask me to "provide" my interpretation of what Assange said.... about the accusations or rape that were made?

If you read the legal documents yourself then you have to know that even you can't fulfill your own request, because the Swedish legal documents about what Assange said about his legal predicament DO NOT EXIST!!

In fact, that is the MAIN COMPLAINT OF SWEDISH LEGAL OFFICIALS that NO SWEDISH PROSECUTORS arranged for an interview with Assange to get his side of the story while he was in Sweden, and neither did they arrange an interview when he was in England. They said in the documentation that they thought that this was UNFAIR!

Eat it lessersteven.

So just read the damned transcript and the real facts and the written complaint. Stop being so damned obtuse.

Actually and honestly.... I don't expect you to read the truth and absorb it.

So ask yourself, do you wish to continue to be a person with a reputation of being untrustworthy to investigate and report the honest facts here on DU?

One thing for sure. Whenever I see your name I will know who you are.

[stevenleser]

238. There are a myriad of links on the web that dispute you

First, my request was aimed at the other person since they are the ones who claimed that Assange did not materially admit to everything. In fact, he did.

As this link and hundreds more like it show, http://studentactivism.net/2011/07/12/assange-lawyer-concedes/ , what Assanges defense rests in is the contention that yes, he did those things, but statements or actions made by the woman he raped after the fact essentially amounts to consent after the fact.

Assanges attorney goes as far to say that he does not say anything negative about the women and he says that Assange did "disturbing and disrespectful" sexual things to the women.

Assange and his attorney have essentially admitted to everything and the idea of consent after the fact is laughable.

[AikidoSoul]

239. You are still using information from opinion sites who agree with you about your Assange claims.

You said: "As this link and hundreds more like it show...." and then coninue in your effort to convince me of your position. I went to the ONE site you provided but found only undocumented negative opinions about Assange so very similar to your own.

http://studentactivism.net/2011/07/12/assange-lawyer-concedes/

--- which is the work of Angus Johnston, whose biased and undocumented statements are very similar to yours. Maybe you are him!

Notice your claim that "....this link and hundreds more like it show...." which suggests that they all are saying what you are saying about Assange.

So stevenleser where are these ".... hundreds more like it..." that you refer to? Are they from Faux Noise and their sychophants?

Please, please, please ---stick with documented facts. Go to the Swedish legal documents inadvertently posted by msanthrope, one of the few who are in your camp. She probably didn't read it because the document totally blows away both of your cases against Assange!

But here it is again kiddo, you have one more chance to get it right!

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110224-Britain-Ruling-Assange-Extradition-to-Sweden.pdf

Read it. Then ask youself the same question asked by the Swedish legal opionions about this case: Why did the female Swedish prosecutor REFUSE to interview Assange while he was in Sweden? She didn't even try! In that document objective analyses by Swedish legal minds state that the prosecutor's lack of action was unfair to the defendant. She also refused to have him interviewed in England. The document stated that this is unusual and unfair. The document also stated that it was wrong and even illegal to publish anything about an alleged sex crime prior to trial.

Get it that the most telling part of this mess is that the prosecutor did not want closure on the Assange case and that's why she refused to interview him. And it went into the newspapers which made worldwide headlines. This is not the way investigations are conducted normally in Sweden. Instead, she let Assange twist in the wind of uncertainty which creates an environment for anyone to project whatever garbage they want to onto Assage. The prosecutor did this on purpose by creating that environment of uncertainty, along with the usually forbidden publicity.

And you don't think she was influenced from some higher ups with connections to Big Money and Big Power?

This kind of purposful negligence is very unfair to ANY person being accused of a crime. And that is said clearly in the legal documents by Swedish legal experts who seem appalled at the way this case has been "mishandled", and I agree with hifiguy that this was done

ON PURPOSE.

The points that hifiguy was making about activists routinely being targeted and hurt in some way in order to deactivate them is TRUE. It has happend thousands of times throughout history and now is an epidemic in many countries including our own. This is just one case and it should be completely obvious to any educated person who has read a lot about political topics, who also happens to have critical thinking skills.

If you read a few dozen pages of WikiLeaks you might be able to understand how angry and embarrassed the 1/10 percenters would become at the worldwide exposure ratting them out about the tricks they played (and continue to play) and how they rig the games in economic and political systems.

If you are unable to detach yourself from preconceived ideas that were fed to you by your associations with authority figures in the past.... then you need to give up trying to debate these issues. The lens of your brain may have hardened into a very narrow focus. It is obvious to me and to others that your "documentation" is not a genuine attempt to get to the truth, it is just another opinion that matches your own, while the actual legal documents have facts that are facts.

Please open up the lens of your mind and stop this shit. It really is irritating me and I have better things to do that talk to a brick wall.

[stevenleser]

260. The problem you have is, Assange's attorney said these things. You can't explain that away. nt

[hifiguy]

61. Jesus.

These women could have been told their mission was to have sex with Assange for the purporse of blackmail or just have sex with him and then fabrcate rape allegations or more likely, repeat a rape story the spooks gave them. They may well have been victims, but if so, they were victims of the spooks, not Assange.

[msanthrope]

71. do you have any evidence to support this theory you have about these these women? nt

[hifiguy]

77. My "theory" which is actually a hypothesis,

is that they may well have been bribed or pressured by authorities to cooperate in framing Assange. People can be coerced into doing exceedingly nasty things if the pressure and/or threats are well-designed and skillfully applied, particularly when those doing the threatening are in positions of legal and institutional power. Who knows, they may even have been blackmailed or threatened with retaliation if they did not cooperate. It's certainly not beyond the realm of possibility. Spy agencies are not known for their tender mercies when they want to get something.

Which would make them victims as well. Of the spies. Beyond that I do not care to venture.

[msanthrope]

79. do you have any evidence for this hypothesis? nt

[hifiguy]

87. You clearly don't understand what a hypothesis is

A scientific hypothesis is the initial building block in the scientific method. Many describe it as an “educated guess,” based on prior knowledge and observation. While this is true, the definition can be expanded. A hypothesis also includes an explanation of why the guess may be correct, according to National Science Teachers Association.

Source: http://www.livescience.com/21490-what-is-a-scientific-hypothesis-definition-of-hypothesis.html

[msanthrope]

91. Okay...give us an "explanation why the guess may be correct." Or, evidence, proof, facts

in support...... take your pick.

[hifiguy]

95. It's all in the OP but here's the bullet point summary

Wikileaks, then headed by Assange, released documents verifying the bogus bases for the Iraq war and tht torture was approved at the highest levels of the American government and that the Brits cooperated.

This infuriated people in the US and British governments. They don't like the truth about things like this coming out about such things and that applies to ANY administration. Witness Obama's war on whistleblowers in general and Chelsea Manning in particular. English and American spy agencies were sicced on Assange and enlisted the agencies of other allied/NATO countries to assist them.

Someone, presumably Swedish intelligence, recruited, bribed, blackmailed, or otherwise coerced women to have sex with Assange. Post 104 in this thread http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027071323 supports this notion. Following these sexual encounters with Assange, they filed sexual assault charges, presumably on the instructions of and inconformance with the orders given by the organization that recruited/coerced them.

The plan was to arrest Assange, hold a show trial, and then turn him over to MI6, or most likely the CIA, where he would be tortured and then disappeared to some black site. The cover explanation would be that he died from (make up the reason here) in prison.

This is incredibly simple. It was done to many prisoners seized in Cheney's War. This is what spy agencies do, the reason they exist. The spy agencies and those who direct them are the only villains here and I do not understand how people can fail to see that.

It's an educated guess that fits with similar actioins that have already been observed and exhaustively documented.

[msanthrope]

119. Again...do you have any evidence to support any of your claims?

start with your first sentence. By the time Assange got around to the Iraq war was there anyone with reason still on the planet who did not know that the basis of the Iraq war was bogus?

[hifiguy]

121. It is an educated guess, like all hypotheses.

It fits comfortably with facts observed in other contexts - i.e., the known methods of intelligence agencies and the ongoing war on whistleblowers. Assange/Wikileaks were the biggest, most famous whistleblowers who revealed the most secrets.

And putting the actual government docs out there where they can no longer be denied or explained away is a cardinal sin. He produced the smoking gun both for anyone who cares now and any historian in the future who cares about the bogus war and the very real torture.

I don't know how to test this hypothesis unless some spy comes in from the cold, as it were, and confirms it. But I believe it to be highly plausible and to possess explanatory power.

[stevenleser]

130. It's all based on a cartoonish version of the CIA where Assange is their biggest national security

priority, they have unlimited resources to engage in a boneheaded conspiracy against him and they have rejected the most simple and low cost solution available if they want someone to stop being a problem.

Other than that it is completely plausible.

[AikidoSoul]

175. HiFiGuy is much closer to truth than you because you refuse to recognize historical patterns

of our NSA, CIA and rogue members of both organizations, plus private covert operatives.

You are like a broken record except that you randomly throw tiny darts at the OP to divert us from really dealing with the possibility that Assange is a REAL HERO!

[msanthrope]

184. What historical pattern? Provide examples of other persons. nt

[AikidoSoul]

384. Your name is so perfect for you, a slight variation of the word "misanthrope" which means

a person who hates or distrusts humankind.

So very perfect. You must hate us so much that you just want to drive us with your vapid commentaries based on doo doo.

Wish you wouldn't clutter up this place. Can't you go hate humankind someplace else?

Please?

[msanthrope]

387. A little feisty this evening, aren't we? nt

[CanSocDem]

120. Ka-boom!

This and the OP.

Always necessary to check for democratic principles around here with our growing reputation for letting people sneak in....




.

[hifiguy]

123. Why thank you!

[leveymg]

202. I agree with you this far HFG: this case should not be assumed to be primarily about rape charges.

Without coming down one way or the other on Assange's guilt or innocence under Swedish Law, this fits a classic "honey trap" set up by intelligence agencies. Oldest trick in The Big Book of Dirty Tricks.

Context is all-important.

[hifiguy]

203. That is the central point at which I was driving.

Things are not what they may seem to be unless one does some critical and skeptical thinking. Especially when so many powerful people have so much to gain.

[leveymg]

207. Roger.

[reorg]

39. LOL

[msanthrope]

43. That's your evidence? nt

[reorg]

53. You know the evidence as well as I do, LOL n/t

[msanthrope]

73. I am sure the rest of Democratic Underground would like to see your evidence posted. nt

[muriel_volestrangler]

29. You dismissed the women out of hand, right at the start of your diatribe

You weren't even willing to consider that Assange had done anything sexual with them that they didn't consent to. All your mind thinks of the women are as tools used by intelligence agencies.

You are objectifying and dehumanising them.

You have no 'facts'; you have a conspiracy theory because, as a misogynist, you are siding with your male political hero over the women, without the slightest hesitation. You're now comparing the women to a war criminal. Fucking disgusting.

[hifiguy]

32. I think they were used by intelligence agencies, a very common practice

throughout history, for the agencies' own purposes. Individuals both male and female are used as the instruentalities of institutional power and have been throughout human history. Since when has power ever shrunk from treating any of its citizens as means toan end? It's the way humans are. Read some Shermer or Pinker.

Believe whatever you want. I always try to look for the logical, and not the emotional, answer when examining the actions of institutional power structures.

Bye now.

[muriel_volestrangler]

36. You're leaving DU? Great.

We don't need any more misogynistic bullshit like this. 'Logical'? Ha. You're just trying to rationalise your contempt for the women.

[hifiguy]

90. Hardly. It is highly likely they were coerced into participation

in an effort to get Assange.

And I am most assuredly NOT leaving DU.

[muriel_volestrangler]

94. Assange admits he started sex with the woman while she was asleep

He thinks that, since she did not struggle once she woke up, her consent to sex the previous night still applied.

Your ridiculous conspiracy theory falls apart at that fact, acknowledged by all sides. This is about a highly unusual act, by Assange, that could have in no way been anticipated by anyone. You pollute this story with crap that denies the women agency, and the way you do it is some of the worst anti-woman posting I've ever seen on DU. It's not as if you're agreeing with Assange; you are producing birther-level bullshit, pulled out of your arse. And it stinks.

12.07pm:
Emmerson is now explaining the alleged victim SW's witness statement. Emmerson says:

They fell asleep and she woke up by his penetrating her. She immediately asked if he was wearing anything. He answered: "You." She said: "You better not have HIV." He said: "Of course not." She may have been upset, but she clearly consented to its (the sexual encounter's) continuation and that is a central consideration.

12.20pm:
The thrust of the Assange team's case is that there was no lack of consent in the incidents and that the Swedish district courts were misled by the wording of the arrest warrant. Emmerson says it is "surprising and disturbing" that the warrant misled the district judges by misinterpreting witness statements.
...
Emmerson said earlier that he was not challenging the fact that they "found Mr Assange's sexual behaviour in these encounters disreputable, discourteous, disturbing or even pushing towards the boundaries of what they were comfortable with". But the sexual activities that occurred had taken place with consent, he argued, and, unlike in Sweden, could not be criminalised in the English jurisdiction.
...
The alleged rape by Assange when he had sex with SW when she was asleep or half asleep was not a crime, Emmerson says, because SW then consented.
...

Nothing I say should be taken as denigrating the complainant, the genuineness of their feelings of regret, to trivialise their experience or to challenge whether they felt Assange's conduct was disrespectful, discourteous, disturbing or even pushing at the boundaries of what they felt comfortable with.

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/jul/12/julian-assange-extradition-live-coverage

Now can you see how hateful your inventions are? You don't know what the fuck the case is about, but you leap in with denials that any wrong could have been done by Assange to women, because he exposes government secrets.

You need some basic lessons in respect for women.

[hifiguy]

97. The only villains in my hypothesis are the intelligence agencies and those who directed them

to "Get" Assange.

Spy agencies don't threaten, blackmail, coerce and bribe people? That's news to me. They also KILL people. Frequently and in exceedingly nasty ways. See the long and bloody history of the American CIA. It's what they DO and always HAVE DONE throughout human history. They seek to coopt people and use them as means towards their own ends. "Do X for us or suffer consequence Y" is a threat. That is what deprives someone of agency. This is the essence of intelligence work.

Seeing everything in the world through only one lens is guaranteed to distort your vision.

[muriel_volestrangler]

103. You ignore that your accusations are impossible; you accuse the women of lying

rather than accept the reality that Assange and his team acknowledge. You are ranting "intelligence agencies are evil! Therefore Assange cannot have raped anyone!" It's a total non sequitur, but you're doing it at the expense of women. And you don't care.

Assange argues about consent. You invent a useless, lunatic conspiracy theory (if the USA wanted to extradite Assange for his Wikileaks activity, then they would have asked for him to be arrested for that. A rape case in Sweden would only delay any chance they had of getting hold of him. Or they would have waited for him to return to the UK, from where extradition to the USA is horribly easy).

Can you not see how disgraceful your behaviour in this thread is? I don't think I've seen any DUer stoop as low in an attempted defence of Assange as you are. "Seeing everything in the world through only one lens is guaranteed to distort your vision" - I have never seen anyone so un-self-aware on DU as you are now. You worship Assange, and therefore conclude it is impossible for him to ever abuse women, therefore any accusation against him must come from the evil people you hate.

[hifiguy]

105. I am done with your crap and most especially the completely bogus

and snidely condescending personal attacks. There are clearly many here who disagree with you.

[muriel_volestrangler]

109. Assange and his legal team agree with me on the facts

and that's why your fantasies are ridiculous and a dangerous red herring distracting from the actual situation. That you continue to fail to acknowledge the facts in the case, in favour of an attack on the women, speaks volumes about your attitude to women.

You do Assange no favours by making up misogynistic nonsense that you think helps him.

[stevenleser]

133. You're not supposed to talk about facts. You're supposed to indulge in wild conspiracy theories.

Come on Muriel, get with the program!

[AikidoSoul]

219. Your accusations against Hifyguy are truly out of context of anything he is

asserting in his posts.

I see no evidence whatsoever that he disrespects women. You seem to have made up your mind without objectively reading what his points are.

Assange had consensual sex with two women while in Sweden.

Consent is consent.

Read your own post. Search for the word "consent" and "consented" which appear four times in your excerpt! So please get the point that they consented.

Their only concern was the condom and if you'll notice, the lady who asked whether he had one, and realized he did not, continued the sex and did not object to the penetration.

It may have been days later when this lady found another woman (I wish I knew how she found her) who then went together to authorities to ask them to get Assange tested for venereal disease.

The PO's points about sex being used to entrap activists who embarrass powerful people is a true statement with a long history in our country and in others as well.

You should know that by now.

[muriel_volestrangler]

221. Read the OP. It starts by denying the possibility that the women are telling the truth

and that it could possibly be a genuine case of sexual assault or rape. It asserts that the accusations are 'completely phony'. It asserts that the women were made to hook up with Assange by an intelligence agency. It dismisses, as a matter of principle, both that the women had any kind of relationship out of their own free will, and that they then had objections to what Assange did.

Assange accepts both that the women started becoming intimate with him freely, and that they now think he did something wrong. His version is that they were willing early on, and that he always gave them adequate opportunity to stop things and that they did not, so were still willing, and later became unhappy with how he had behaved. This would be something to sort out, in court if necessary. He does not need to fantasise about intelligence agencies putting him into a situation where he would start having sex with a sleeping woman. Because that's the heart of the rape accusation, and he admits he did. Which doesn't fit with anyone trying to set him up.

hifiguy cannot conceive of the women actually telling the truth about how they feel, or how they saw the events. He insists they are tools of an intelligence agency. This automatic dismissal of 2 women as liars trying to entrap a man is fundamentally misogynistic. If we saw it claimed on behalf of someone who wasn't admired politically, we'd all see it for the woman-hating bullshit it is.

It's an idiotic conspiracy theory, anyway, because it would be far easier to extradite Assange to the USA if there was no rape accusation. It would be easier still to do it from the UK, again without a rape accusation that gets in the way. But clinging onto a conspiracy theory that doesn't make sense, to dismiss on principle what 2 women say, just makes it worse.

[2banon]

278. You need some basic lessons in Human Behavior.

As a Woman and fully capable as any other HUMAN BEING (of EITHER GENDER) to lie cheat and steal even capable of murder with my own bare hands (no guns needed) motivated either for self defense reasons, self preservation, or other myriad of SELF INTERESTS. is not misogynistic to reveal, observe or claim.

Misogyny is about Hate. Period. You think every and any woman dead or alive are angels of god not subjected to human foibles as any man?

Disagree with the OP's hypothesis, but calling Misogyny is OTT reactionary at best, and just plain WRONG.

[muriel_volestrangler]

281. It's because the OP won't even consider that the women could be telling the truth

He says it is nothing at all to do with Assange's relationship with them, and dismisses anyone who even thinks it possible that the women are telling the truth about how they feel as 'foolish'. He cannot conceive that Assange did what they said he did. Even though Assange admits to penetrating one of them while she was asleep. He's actually saying that Assange is being 'foolish', because Assange says it is about the women as well as him (he says the whole series of events mean they consented).

That's misogynistic - an automatic dismissal, without thought, of what the women say. They are then painted as tools of an intelligence agency. The OP does not just put forward a hypothesis of what might have happened; it insists that the women cannot even think they are telling the truth, and anyone who contemplates that they are saying what they think happened is 'foolish'.

[2banon]

316. I understand. But that isn't the point of the OP.

The O.P. is reminding how the intelligence communities operate going back to millennium.

Tools and "devices" kept on the shelf along with a myriad of other deceptive practices to be used whenever it's useful as a distraction, or as a useful devise to "capture" their target. Well known documented Common Practices.

We will likely never know with any degree of certainty as to the merits of the rape charges. They could be true and given certain aspects of Assange's personality we've seen on display at various times tends to put out a certain socio-pathic vibe sexually speaking that would easily compel some to conclude the charges are factual. But those "vibes" are not proof of anything.. speaking for myself, those "instincts" are likely reacting to something I've seen or experienced before.

But equally possible is that those charges are false. it's just as possible completely fabricated particularly considering the context these charges were brought.

The women could have been coerced to make these claims for reasons only known to "authorities". In other words, maybe they had a hand in something illegal or perhaps they were going to be levelled with "espionage" charges (whether valid or not) simply for the purpose of nailing Assange.

We can speculate until the cows come home as to what the behind the scenes subterfuge and machinations actually are.. We're never going to know.

But what we do know and need to be reminded of from time to time apparently is making shite up is standard practice when the 'State Security apparatuses intend to go after, silence or nail their target one way or another.

There is no misogyny involved in the OP. Assange might be a misognynist, but we do not actually know this. And we shouldn't be litigating what we don't know.

What we do know is that Assange with the assistance of several others performed a very valuable service to citizens here and abroad. What's at issue is how the State is reacting to what (and how) was revealed to us and what do we think of THAT.

[muriel_volestrangler]

317. You're weighing possibilities; the OP is declaring the rape charges must be false

Your approach to this is fine - skepticism about governments and what they might try to shut Assange up. But the OP declares him completely innocent of any wrongdoing, and calls the idea that he could have done anything wrong 'foolish'. Not because of any doubt about what happened, whether Assange thought he had consent, and so on, but because Assange is a man who is to be absolutely believed, while the women are dismissed as irrelevant. It's not about them in any form, the way the OP is worded.

[2banon]

323. No, that isn't quite true. .

He's not saying the charges are absolutely not true, he's saying it's likely false given the context the charges are being brought. Reminding us what is actually at issue here.

[AikidoSoul]

324. Your words don't match what the OP actually said

You said:

"But the OP declares him completely innocent of any wrongdoing and calls the idea that he could have done anything wrong 'foolish'. Not because of any doubt about what happened, whether Assange thought he had consent, and so on, but because Assange is a man who is to be absolutely believed, while the women are dismissed as irrelevant. It's not about them in any form, the way the OP is worded." (bolded emphasis mine)


The OP expressed his "hypothesis" that is based on a pattern of how dissidents are treated by our government, and actually, has gone back thousands of years as the powerful target those who reveal the lies behind the curtain, so to speak.

The words highlighted above from your quote --the OP did not say those things. Those are exaggerted words that you projected onto him from your own mind.

To "be absolutely believed" -- your absolutist statement.

"completely innocent of any wrong doing and calls the idea he could have done anything wrong 'foolish"

That is another absolutist statement

"...while the women are dismissed as irrelevant..." He didn't say or suggest that in any way.

....your words Muriel, not the OP's.

[muriel_volestrangler]

326. No 'hypothesis' in the OP; 'only' about espionage and whistleblowing; not about the wmoen

Here's the bits of the OP, with its emphasis, on whether this is 'hypothesis', definite, or whether the women are of any concern to hifiguy:

I have been around DU for 10+ years and seldom have I seen more nonsense, twaddle and utter foolishness spouted about any topic than Julian Assange.
...
First, the entire Assange case is about two interrelated issues, and two only: Whistleblowing and international espionage. Nothing else is of any relevance to a global understanding of this case. NOTHING. Not one thing about this case is about any person save Julian Assange.
...
Swedish intelligence is leaned on by MI6 or the CIA to do something about Assange - preferably something that would result in his arrest, after which he would disappear or die after secretly being subjected to preliminaries that might even make Dick Cheney blanch. How to do, how to do? Find some bait for a trap. Bribe/pay or pressure/threaten (with blackmail or other negative consequences) a couple of women to pursue Assange and let nature take its course. Then have the woman or women file completely phony rape accusations against Assange, with all the administrative detail work tended to by the spooks. Elementary tradecraft, and anyone who believes that this is not possible or in fact likely is a useful idiot at best. Arrest Assange for rape, hold a rigged show trial, convict him, and leave him to the tender mercies of the torturers before disposing of him and announcing to the public that he died in prison of unknown or indeterminate causes. Again, this is what spies do for a living. Eecuting these kinds of actions like is why there ARE spies in the first place.

But Assange smelled the rat behind the curtain and flipped the tables on them. And the useful idiots swallow the official story of the intelligence agencies hook, line and sinker.
...
And if you cannot see the logic of this argument, the overwhelming probability that it is true, and how intelligence agencies work in the real world, there is, simply put, no hope for you. You are hopelessly and irredeemably blind and deaf to the nature of reality and your words are worthless.

Got that? Other people's ideas are "nonsense, twaddle and utter foolishness". The entire case is only about whistleblowing and international espionage. "Nothing else is of any relevance to a global understanding of this case. NOTHING. Not one thing about this case is about any person save Julian Assange." Yes, he is precisely saying the women and their viewpoint is irrelevant. He talks of "the overwhelming probability that it is true", and that anyone who can't see that has no hope, and "your words are worthless". That, of course, include the women, because this isn't about them at all; it's only about Assange, whistleblowing and espionage. What anyone who listens to them says is 'worthless' too, of course. They are "useful idiots". The accusations are "completely phony".

The ridiculous idea that hifiguy thinks is overwhelmingly probable is that an intelligence agency sent the women to trap Assange. One of them was involved in organising a lecture by him - she was the press secretary for part of the Social Democratic Party. She was not a femme fatale who turned up out of nowhere. Then he goes of into a torture fantasy, as if a prison sentence in Sweden is the equivalent of Guantanamo. It's one of the most liberal countries in the world. If the US wanted him extradited on some espionage charge, then that's what they would have done - probably from the UK, where extradition to the US is ridiculously easy. Assange went to the UK, and still there was no attempt at extradition .The fantasy hifiguy has concocted is not remotely credible.

I think the most disgusting thing here was "let nature take its course". Assange, by his own admission, started sex with one of them while she was asleep. This idea that men just cannot help mistreating women and that we should accept it is misogynistic bullshit, which doesn't cast men is a good light either. It's trying to justify treating a woman as an object. Saying this is "nature taking its course" disgusts me. It's vile.

[hifiguy]

335. Saying that people like to, and do, have sex is vile?

You're funny and you don't even know it. And that it is a hypothesis should be abvious to anyone smart enough to be able to type.

[muriel_volestrangler]

336. It's vile that you think men mistreat women sexually as a matter of course

and that you would give Assange a pass for it because he's your political hero.

[AikidoSoul]

388. There is NOTHING in your highlighted post material that can be construed as a

rape, or mysogynist. And it very disturbing for you to ask hyfyguy if he "...can see how hateful your inventions are?" Honestly. I haven't seen one word from him that is hateful towards those women.

You may or may not have had sex in your lifetime, but I can tell you from experience that it's not unusual for a partner
to start stimulating the sleeping partner so they can have sex.

You may hate sex for all I know, or be afraid of it.... or hate men.... or whatever.....but something's askew with the way you read and analyze the actions of Assange and the two women. A lot of documentation has been provided in this thread and yet you continue to travel down that dark narrow road.

It's disturbing.

[randome]

389. You have now officially lost this thread. I'm out.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]

[muriel_volestrangler]

390. Documentation? Yes, I linked to the report of the extradition hearing

in which Assange's lawyer admitted he penetrated the woman while she was asleep. That's the documentation. But, remember, you're defending an OP that says what happened to the women is irrelevant, because hifiguy likes what Assange did at Wikileaks. hifiguy dismisses what they say as not worth listening to, by definition, because Assange is such a swell guy.

[AikidoSoul]

393. You really do twist things around to suit your obsession with the idea

that the women were violated even though they say it was consensual.

Even the "penetration" while the woman was asleep was consensual because she awoke, as you well know, and they
continued.

You behave as though you don't think that would be a normal sexual activity, and that is really sad.

Many sensual beings get sensualized in the middle of the night and are grateful for the person next to them... who
if not too sleepy will play.

You seem a bit starchy.

And you keep REFUSING to see that there is more to this story than the women.

What do you think about Karl Rove's involvement.

Let's change the discussion a bit.

What about one of the women being involved with a Cuban women's group funded by our government?

What about her CIA connections?

Are you unable to open up the lens of you mind, or do you just see "women, rape, misogyny, hate, penetration, asleep." etc., etc.

[muriel_volestrangler]

398. You're taking this conversation in a very nasty direction

You're criticising the women for not enjoying sex they way you think it should be enjoyed (eg they like being conscious when penetrated, you think that's not important), and you're then dismissing their views on sex as irrelevant, and wanting to change the discussion.

"do you just see "women, rape, misogyny, hate, penetration, asleep." etc., etc. " - well, that's what it is about. The USA never tried to extradite Assange from Sweden or the UK, despite having over a year to do so. The people who want to tell everyone that they get to decide what women should submit to in sex, especially when it's with a Very Important Man, are the kind of people who no-one should allow anywhere near them, sexually or politically.

[AikidoSoul]

399. Projection, projection, projection

I never made any comment whatsoever whether the women did, or did not enjoy sex. I do know they consented. Whether they enjoyed it or not --- you would have to ask them. One thing for certain, nowhere in the legal literature regarding this case did they say that they did not enjoy it. The ONLY thing that appeared as a concern is that they wanted was for Assange to be tested for venereal disease.

The woman who was asleep when Assange made advances to her, -- is that so awful? It is quite often a natural occurrence in real life for many of us. Whether she enjoyed it or not ... you would have to ask her. I do know that once he made the advances -- that she allowed him to make love to her, and did not resist. Muriel, it may come as a shock to you, but some women actually enjoy it if their partner approaches and penetrates them while sleeping... especially when it's close to the time to wake up anyway. Many women have experienced this. It's a lovely way to wake up. Many have experienced it as playful and joyful.

Nobody in this thread suggested anything about when women should "submit" to sex. Interesting word you use Muriel --- "submit" as though sex is some kind of punishment -- or that women are intrinsically helpless, and are forced to assume a passive attitude when having sex with a man.

You accused me of "taking this conversation in a very nasty direction." What is nasty about it? Are you squeamish about the act of sex? You were the one who brought it up to begin with, so don't expect it not to be on the table for discussion!

Misogyny is a problem in the world-at-large, but I don't see Assange as behaving like a misogynist in his sexual encounters with the women. The two women even bragged of their famous conquest among their associates. But if you trust their intentions, after all one of them is suspected of having CIA affiliations, well why don't you make it your project to write to them and ask away?

BROKEN RECORD: Assange could not be extradited without being charged with a crime. He was not charged because the prosecutor did not fulfill her duties to conduct an interview with the subject. Please remember that it was Karl Rove's suggestion that he be "snatched".

Maybe that would satisfy you if he ended up in the horrid detention facility in Cuba?

Assange left Sweden because he was afraid they WOULD extradite or kidnap him. Assange knows that the Swedish government and the womens' legal council, have cooperated with at least one Extraordinary Rendition which enabled two persons seeking asylum to be taken to Eygpt and tortured.

It's a pity that you cannot see the good that Assange has done by revealing the thousands of lies told by many governments including our own, some of which led to unneccessary wars which made the war profiteers quite happy. I'm sure many women and girls were raped in those wars.

There were many other lies as well that incrementally rigged countries' political and economic systems to benefit the SuperRich at the expense of the rest of us. So who are the bad guys -- Assange or the thousands of liars who have created great wealth for the 1/10% who are made up of war profiteers among others?

[muriel_volestrangler]

400. Here's what's nasty:

You ignore that the woman did object to being penetrated while asleep (both at the time, and when she laid the complaint with the police), and say that people who do object, such as her, are 'a bit starchy', that objecting to that could be a sign of hating sex, being afraid of it, hating men, or 'something askew'. You find it 'disturbing'. You apply this to me too. No, I having never penetrated an unconscious or sleeping woman, and I think that's fine.

[AikidoSoul]

402. Oh for God's sake Muriel, why don't you go work with a rape hotline or

with groups that counsel women who have suffered violent rape.

Why don't you help change the laws in the USA that allow police departments to IGNORE the rape kits that have the evidence to prosecute rape crimes?

This should interest you if you want to pay attention to the real scourge of helpless rape victims who are not helped by the law enforcement and legal systems in the good ol' USA:


https://www.rainn.org/news-room/usa-today-rape-kit-investigation

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/untested-rape-kits/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_kit

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/rape-kits-n393186

[muriel_volestrangler]

403. ?

[MrMickeysMom]

229. Speak for yourself, muriel...

I have great respect for this entire missive of HFG. That doesn't make me anything but a thinking individual.

If you're really looking for misogynistic bullshit, I don't think you found it here.

See ya.

[randome]

166. Damn, you think getting a hide makes you somehow worthy of something?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[elias49]

169. What the fuck are you on about?

Try making some sort of sense!

Anyone care to explain this comment? Non sequitur?
Anyone?

[stevenleser]

234. He was on about the fact that he could tell what you wrote would be hidden because

It was over the top.

And no, I neither alerted nor was I on the jury.

[hifiguy]

178. There are people on this site who could and would

take the statement "I really like beer, pizza, and cats" (all true for me, btw) and their Absolutely Paranoid minds would find within evidence of a great hidden racist or misogynist conspiracy and spend 100 posts unmercifully pillorying the poster. That's just the way it is around here these days. Yez gotta accept that and learn to deal with it and become a duck - let it slide off your back.

[AikidoSoul]

222. I love beer, pizza, cats and ducks. We have a lot in common.

But it really does take a lot of discipline for me not to call people names like stupid dumb asses, or something similar. You seem to have the duck thing down very well.

Jeez.... just writing "stupid dumb asses" made me feel so happy. I'm having trouble evolving!!

Think I'll go get a beer.

[2banon]

276. Twisted Distortion and calling misogyny is absolutely OTT. You have no basis for that, NONE.

[hifiguy]

374. To quote the great physicist Wolfgang Pauli,

You are not even WRONG.

To just be wrong you have to be a couple parsecs closer to the truth than you are.

[muriel_volestrangler]

375. Of course you don't like the description of your misogynistic conspiracy theory

and so you'll say it's all just dandy. I've been quoting what you said. The truth is there for all to see. It's in the OP.

[hifiguy]

382. ...

You should really do something about those demons tattooed on the insides of your eyelids.

Done with your silliness and paranoia now.

[seabeyond]

383. true enough, and a history, too. nt

[AikidoSoul]

386. "True enough" you say, "and a history too" ??? Why the "NT"? Document your words

At least read the entire thread before you stick your two second opinion into something you haven't even studied.

The Assange story is a complicated one. Are you complicated enough to study something before you shoot off a six word put-down?

[seabeyond]

391. stick your two second opinion into something you haven't even studied.

you do make assumptions.

as "you shoot off ... "

[KoKo]

373. Excellent Post....another K&R!

[AikidoSoul]

223. Oh for God's sake Muriel, GOOGLE the international reports on what really

did happen and stop these baseless attacks on the OP.

You are a better person than that.

Aren't you?

[AikidoSoul]

377. You continue to judge Julian Assange solely on alleged crimes for which he has not even been charged

How can fairness exist in the words coming out of your mind, Muriel_Volestranger as you continue to accuse and attack him? You villify him for alleged sexual acts by a politically motivated Swedish prosecutor who would not even interview him so he could not be charged, even if he is guilty. Then add the politically motivated lawyer representing the two accusers. One of the women has a documented reputation of being involved with a CIA supported organization.

How about in your personal relationships? Do you loathe and mistrust your neighbors based on rumors and gossip?

Julian Assange has done the world a great service. How can you so completely discount the good he has done? You seem too eager to ignore the fact that he revealed lies and acts that have cost us trillions of dollars, and has cost many hundreds of thousands of lives. Hundreds of thousands of families have been misplaced because of those lies. Are these lies supposed to be kept secret forever? How can good people change the world and make our country a REAL Democracy without knowing where the evil is hiding?

Why do you continue to hate him Muriel_volestrangler?

[muriel_volestrangler]

378. As his lawyer said, he started having sex with the woman while she was asleep

They claim that he had sufficient consent from the previous night. The woman says not. It's the kind of thing that ought to be sorted out in police or prosecutor's interviews, or a court, in the country it happened in. I don't hate him, but I don't turn a blind eye to his behaviour to women based on his political activities.

No man is above the law.

[AikidoSoul]

380. You continue to judge Julian Assange solely on alleged crimes for which he has not even been charged

How can fairness exist in the words coming out of your mind, Muriel_Volestranger as you continue to accuse and attack him? You villify him for alleged sexual acts by a politically motivated Swedish prosecutor who would not even interview him knowing full well that by refusing to do so that he could not be charged! So do you seriously think she believes he's guilty? If she did, don't you think she would take steps to interview him so he could be charged? Then add the politically motivated lawyer representing the two accusers. One of the women has a documented reputation of being involved with a CIA supported organization.

How about in your personal relationships? Do you loathe and mistrust your neighbors based on rumors and gossip?

Julian Assange has done the world a great service. How can you so completely discount the good he has done? You seem too eager to ignore the fact that he revealed lies and acts that have cost us trillions of dollars, and has cost many hundreds of thousands of lives. Hundreds of thousands of families have been misplaced because of those lies. Are these lies supposed to be kept secret forever? How can good people change the world and make our country a REAL Democracy without knowing where the evil is hiding?

Why do you continue to hate him Muriel_volestrangler?

[Betty Karlson]

11. Crudely said, but well written. K&R eom

[msanthrope]

12. except of course that he admitted doing the acts described in the warrant.

His legal appeal was based in part on the fact that even though he did do the acts described in the warrant they weren't crimes in Great Britain and therefore he could not be extradited to Sweden.

he was wrong.

[stevenleser]

15. Now you weren't supposed to mention that.

Nor of course, are you supposed to mention the fact that what OP is claiming doesn't make sense at all.

Fact is, if he bothered folks at that level as badly as is claimed, a rape charge is a poor way of dealing with Assange. It requires establishment of all kinds of evidence that would fall apart at any kind of hearing or trial.

A corrupt top government and/or intelligence agency would save a lot of time and effort with a relatively inexpensive bullet. Just ask Vladimir Putin. He seems to go that route pretty often.

[msanthrope]

21. Assange managed to walk the streets of Great Britain free for 2 years while his appeal was going on

That's got to be the slowest goddamn black bag operation the CIA has ever pulled.

[stevenleser]

67. That kind of slow turnaround is so not what a rogue government or intel agency would do.

I'm not saying it has never ever happened. Intel agencies have tried some batshit crazy stuff over the decades. But the top ones now are pretty into getting things handled quickly and efficiently.

They dont have time for silly stuff like what the OP is alleging.

[reorg]

49. Repeating your lies doesn't make them better n/t

[msanthrope]

60. I can't make you read his legal argument but here they are......

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110224-Britain-Ruling-Assange-Extradition-to-Sweden.pdf

[reorg]

64. I read it before you and that's how I know you are lying n/t

[stevenleser]

68. OK, so in your opinion/interpretation, what did Assange say? nt

[SidDithers]

58. How dare you introduce facts into a perfectly good Alex Jones level CT?...

It couldn't be that Assange is simply a fuckwit with a massive ego and a disregard for women. I mean, men like that hardly exist at all.

No, it must be a complex honey trap operation, involving police and intelligence agencies from at least 3 nations.

How could it be more clear?

Sid

[stevenleser]

85. It's fascinating how a certain segment of the left will promptly throw everyone under the bus to

protect their sacred cows.

People of Color, women, etc. They all go under the bus and at light speed if it protects Greenwald/Assange/Sanders, etc.

[msanthrope]

89. white men of privilege need protection. what could be more authoritarian than that? nt

[mythology]

13. This is wild theorizing without a shred of proof

You invent a theory that the U.S. government and the British government worked together to get two women in Sweden to charge him with rape so the Swedish government would arrest him so Assange could then be extradited to the U.S. Why bother involving the third country? Could the devious scoundrels not find a British woman to go along with their machiavellian scheme? Or is that extra step to throw everybody else off of the scent?

Why not get him tried for murder if they are faking the charges? Wouldn't that be a more sinister crime? If they are going to the effort to fake this, why half ass it?

But I'm sure that's just proof of how devious they are, since you refuse to even admit that you could could be wrong, going so far as to say that people who have an open mind as having a worthless opinion.

Without even a shred of proof other than the absolute certainty that you can't be wrong, what separates your theory from those who believe the moon landing was faked or Obama was born in Kenya? After all, they can't be swayed either.

[hifiguy]

18. Do you have even the slightest knowledge of the history

and activities of the major intelligence agencies in the post-WW II era? It's not like it's hard to find.

Do you think their principal activities consist of playing highly sophisticated computer versions of Risk and Stratego?

[msanthrope]

31. do you have the slightest knowledge of history of rape prosecutions?

seriously it's entirely possible for Assange to be both a rapist and someone who exposed government secrets.

[Zorra]

30. My, my, hifiguy. I do believe you hit a nerve.

[hifiguy]

38. i intended to.

So tired of people choosing not to understand the facts before them and use Occam's Razor.

The only question that needs to be answered with regard to Assange is an ancient one - Who benefits from removing Assange from the scene because of his exposure of government lies? "Cui bono" (not the DUer of the same name is ALWAYS the first question that should be asked when a controversy like this arises. It's common sense to ask it. His personality or politics do not matter, though Ibelieve he has performed invaluable public services in his work with Wikileaks. The answer is could not be more obvious.

[msanthrope]

40. as someone who has survived sexual assault ya he did hit a nerve.....

Is that the nerve you think he was going for?

[hifiguy]

45. It was not.

My point, clear enough, I should think, is that institutional power will do anything to silence and destroy anyone who threatens it.

Assange threatens a lot of institutional power, therefore he must be destroyed by any possible means. Power politics as old as the Egyptians, pure and simple.

[msanthrope]

57. have you considered the context of your own writing?

Perhaps you should considering that you're posting on a liberal democratic board full of women.

[hifiguy]

74. Oh, really.

I am arguing that it is well within the realm of probability that an individual who stood up to government power was targeted by powerful people in government for the purposes of silencing him. That is a classic definition of a liberal - someone who calls foul when they see governmental power being used to cover the asses of those who commit objectively evil deeds by starting bogus wars and torturing people.

The women ensnared in this series of events may well have been victims, and if they are, they were victims of the persons who manipulated them into this nasty little plot, and not of Assange.

And apparently you can't see my avatar and sigline.

[msanthrope]

78. what the hell does Bernie sanders have to do with this? nt

[hifiguy]

88. You pointedly asked if I "knew" that I am posting on a liberal board

My reference to my avatar and sigline was my answer to that silly question.

[Maedhros]

37. In my mind, the only relevant point is this:

Charges against Assange have absolutely nothing to do with the legitimacy of the information released by Wikileaks.

So stop bringing up charges against Assange as a rebuttal to points raised about Wikileaks information.

[hifiguy]

42. Would Assange be pursued so doggedly had he not

angered powerful people in governments around the world? That is the first question to ask.

Who benefits from Assange being removed from the scene and made an example of so that others who would do what he did might be deterred? Another elementary question, I think.

[Maedhros]

52. I tend to agree with your reasoning, but those points are very difficult to prove -

especially in the face of the fierce authoritarianism that took hold of the Democratic Party once Obama became the President who is building the police/surveillance state.

[SidDithers]

44. ...

Speaking of "twaddle and utter foolishness".

Don't we have a Creative Speculation group for fantasy such as the creative writing found in the OP?

Sid

[hifiguy]

48. My opinion of you already can't get any lower.

so laugh away.

[SidDithers]

62. Like i give a fuck...

Your OP is comedy gold. Too bad you don't know it.

Sid

[hifiguy]

65. Consider your not giving a fuck returned doubly

[SidDithers]

70. ...

Sid

[elias49]

157. WTF is that? Why don't you stick with your signature nn-comment

Sid

[Octafish]

51. Nothing says ''Democracy'' like SHUT UP!

How often have we been told in world-weary tones that Wikileaks has revealed nothing new - especially by those who want to appear to be in the know? Here is an aide-mémoire of a few of the highest profile revelations.

by Ryan Gallagher
17 February 2011
OpenDemocracy.net

Since 2006, whistleblower website WikiLeaks ? has published a mass of information we would otherwise not have known. The leaks have exposed dubious procedures at Guantanamo Bay ? and detailed meticulously the Iraq War's unprecedented civilian death-toll ? . They have highlighted the dumping of toxic waste in Africa ? as well as revealed America's clandestine military actions in Yemen and Pakistan ? .

The sheer scope and significance of the revelations is shocking. Among them are great abuses of power, corruption, lies and war crimes. Yet there are still some who insist WikiLeaks has "told us nothing new". This collection, sourced from a range of publications across the web, illustrates nothing could be further from the truth. Here, if there is still a grain of doubt in your mind, is just some of what WikiLeaks has told us:

SNIP...

•The Obama administration worked with Republicans to protect Bush administration officials facing a criminal investigation into torture (see Mother Jones ? )

SNIP...

•More than 66,000 civilians suffered “violent deaths” in Iraq between 2004 and the end of 2009 (see the Telegraph ? )

CONTINUED with LINKS...

http://www.opendemocracy.net/ryan-gallagher/what-has-wikileaks-ever-taught-us-read-on

Gee. No wonder they want to shut up Assange and the Internet he rode in on.

The picture above is of Jose Padilla in his sensory deprivation goggles.

[SidDithers]

96. Your defense of Assange, like your defense of Bill Cosby...

is both curious and ill-considered.




Sid

[Octafish]

102. Nice smear. Here's today's news...

Better than anything you've contributed:

Julian Assange: three cases dropped but inquiry into rape allegation continues

Assange says he is disappointed not to give his side of the story after investigations are dropped as prosecutors run out of time to bring charges

David Crouch
The Guardian, Aug. 13, 2015

Swedish prosecutors have dropped their investigation into allegations of sexual assault against Julian Assange after the deadline for bringing charges expired, but said they would continue to pursue an interview with the WikiLeaks founder over an outstanding rape allegation.

SNIP...

Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny said in a statement: “Julian Assange has voluntarily stayed away from justice by taking refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy. Now that the limitation period has passed for some of the (alleged) crimes I am forced to discontinue the preliminary investigation in these parts. This means that the investigation of the events is left unfinished because the suspect has not been heard, which I regret.”

In early June Sweden submitted a request to interrogate Assange at Ecuador’s embassy, Ny said. “It is still my hope to be able to conduct a hearing since there is an ongoing dialogue on the issue between Sweden and Ecuador.”

Assange said he was extremely disappointed in the outcome, saying the Swedish prosecutor has managed to avoid hearing his side of the story entirely.

“From the beginning I offered simple solutions,” Assange said. “Come to the embassy to take my statement or promise not to send me to the United States. This Swedish official refused both. She even refused a written statement … This is beyond incompetence.”

After a tense standoff between Sweden and Ecuador over the conditions of access to Ecuador’s London embassy, on Monday Sweden offered to open talks with Ecuador to reach a formal agreement on judicial cooperation, potentially breaking the deadlock – but not in time to prevent the statute of limitations on most of the accusations expiring.

CONTINUED...

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/aug/13/julian-assange-cases-dropped-but-rape-claim-investigation-continues

Here's something from history that's really important to know: Reporters in 2010 documented the connections between one person accusing Assange and CIA.

[hifiguy]

107. That one is capable only of drive-by one liners

devoid of intellectual content.

[SidDithers]

108. Here's more of the news...

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33907874

Julian Assange case: UK to make formal protest to Ecuador


The British Ambassador in Quito, Ecuador's capital, is to make the formal protest to the Ecuadorean government on Thursday.

"Ecuador must recognise that its decision to harbour Mr Assange more than three years ago has prevented the proper course of justice... It is completely unacceptable that the British taxpayer has had to foot the bill for this abuse of diplomatic relations," said Foreign Office minister Hugo Swire.

Note the use of the word "harbour".

Sid

[elias49]

158. Yeah. Its "harbor" isnt it

in American.
Land of the free and home of the brave.

[SidDithers]

160. No it's "harbour"...

As in harbouring a fugitive.

Sid

[Octafish]

186. So what? The issue is criminalizing journalism for exposing government criminality.

Assange offered years ago to talk to the Swedish authorities. He has done nothing to the United States of America except expose its war crimes and war profiteering.

WikiLeaks' Stratfor Dump Lifts Lid on Intelligence-Industrial Complex

WikiLeaks' latest release, of hacked emails from Stratfor, shines light on the murky world of private intelligence-gathering

by Pratap Chatterjee
Published on Tuesday, February 28, 2012 by The Guardian/UK

What price bad intelligence? Some 5m internal emails from Stratfor, an Austin, Texas-based company that brands itself as a "global intelligence" provider, were recently obtained by Anonymous, the hacker collective, and are being released in batches by WikiLeaks, the whistleblowing website, starting Monday.

The most striking revelation from the latest disclosure is not simply the military-industrial complex that conspires to spy on citizens, activists and trouble-causers, but the extremely low quality of the information available to the highest bidder. Clients of the company include Dow Chemical, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon, as well as US government agencies like the Department of Homeland Security, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Marines.

SNIP...

Assange notes that Stratfor is also seeking to profit directly from this information by partnering in an apparent hedge-fund venture with Shea Morenz, a former Goldman Sachs managing director. He points to an August 2011 document, marked "DO NOT SHARE OR DISCUSS", from Stratfor CEO George Friedman, which says:

"What StratCap will do is use our Stratfor's intelligence and analysis to trade in a range of geopolitical instruments, particularly government bonds, currencies and the like."

CONTINUED...

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/02/28-10?print

Notice the point.

[AikidoSoul]

392. You state the crime and the problem perfectly.

The issue is criminalizing journalism for exposing government criminality.

That's it completely.

What happened to the "free press"?

What is the remedy for stopping the harrassment and imprisonment of those reporting government crimes?

The Supreme Court?

Two meteors falling simultaneously in strategic locations?

A large hurricane that wipes out Houston and D.C?

Seriously though.... can anyone here think of a strategy to erode fascism and build a real Democracy?

Is it that the American Public is so misinformed, lazy and fat that as a whole -- our country just doesn't care enough?

[AikidoSoul]

351. Am glad the prosecutor refused Assange's offer

"From the beginning I offered simple solutions,” Assange said. “Come to the embassy to take my statement or promise not to send me to the United States. This Swedish official refused both. She even refused a written statement …… This is beyond incompetence.”

Am happy the prosecutor refused because why should Assange trust a promise from Sweden not to extradite him to the frothing Rovians in the USA? Sweden knowingly played a signifiant role in American rendition programs which violated treaties they signed having to do with human rights. I seem to remember that they lost a lawsuit by the European Union on this topic.

[AikidoSoul]

352. You are an encyclopedia of info on this topic

Here's one of them.

Revealed: Assange ‘rape’ accuser linked to notorious CIA operative

--- link found here:

http://www.rawstory.com/2010/12/assange-rape-accuser-cia-ties/

A snippet from the story:

Swedish prosecutors told AOL News last week that Assange was not wanted for rape as has been reported, but for something called “sex by surprise” or “unexpected sex.”

One accuser, Anna Ardin, may have “ties to the US-financed anti-Castro and anti-communist groups,” according to Israel Shamir and Paul Bennett, writing for CounterPunch.

While in Cuba, Ardin worked with the Las damas de blanco (the Ladies in White), a feminist anti-Castro group.

Professor Michael Seltzer pointed out that the group is led by Carlos Alberto Montaner who is reportedly connected to the CIA.

Shamir and Bennett also describe Ardin as a “leftist” who “published her anti-Castro diatribes (see here and here) in the Swedish-language publication Revista de Asignaturas Cubanas put out by Misceláneas de Cuba.”

Shamir and Bennett noted that Las damas de blanco is partially funded by the US government and also counts Luis Posada Carriles as a supporter.

A declassified 1976 document (.pdf) revealed Posada to be a CIA agent. He has been convicted of terrorist attacks that killed hundreds of people.

Ardin is “a gender equity officer at Uppsula University – who chose to associate with a US funded group openly supported by a convicted terrorist and mass murderer,” FireDogLake’s Kirk James Murphy observed.

SNIP

[Octafish]

356. I gotta pile on Luis Posada Carriles, BFEE.

From 2006:

Know your BFEE: Los Amigos de Bush

[AikidoSoul]

367. This information blows my mind. The notorious Luis Posada and Anna Ardin - alleged Assange accuser

are linked with each other?!

http://www.rawstory.com/2010/12/assange-rape-accuser-cia-ties/

EXCERPT:

While in Cuba, Ardin worked with the Las damas de blanco (the Ladies in White), a feminist anti-Castro group.

Shamir and Bennett noted that Las damas de blanco is partially funded by the US government and also counts Luis Posada Carriles as a supporter.

SNIP

++++++++++
On another matter...

The BFEE link you provided is mind blowing and intense. It gives me a lot to worry about.

There used to be a guy named Larry Blake in my neighborhood who was a GW I war vet who was chronically ill with GWI. Years ago he had been a tugboat captain for Zapata, a BushCo owned corporation that according to Blake "smuggled contraband". He had been injured on the job and sued the company, but they toyed with him for years. One night he called me up and said that when he met with the attorneys for Zapata one of them threatened him and during the exchange said "if we can get rid of Jack Kennedy, what do you think we can do to you?"

He talked a lot that night and I was under so much stress listening to him that I started to drink vodka to keep my heart from beating out of my chest. I laid down on the floor because I felt like I was going to faint from tachycardia. I kept telling him that it wasn't a good idea to say these things over the phone...but he kept going and I couldn't stop listening. About a week later he called me all excited and said that he got a call from one of the Zapata people who was going to meet him at the Capri, a local bar. He seemed to be under the impression that his legal injury case was about to be settled. Long story short, when driving back from the meeting he crashed his car and was killed.

At the funeral home at the viewing his wife complained that she hadn't been able to find his glasses at the crash site, and that seeing him lying there in the casket... "that he didn't look right without his glasses."

Just wanted to get this one off my chest as it has bothered me for years.

[Octafish]

368. Was it you who was friends with Mr. B? If so, gee!

I had not heard his story. You are very brave for telling it. Any tugboat captain is brave, but he was especially brave for sharing it.

Here's what Mr. Blake's possibly former colleagues meant by getting "rid of Jack Kennedy"...

Poppy Bush was in Dallas on Day JFK was assassinated, he told the FBI. For some reason, he waited until after the President was dead to phone in a warning about a threat on JFK's life he had heard earlier:



Here's a transcript of the text:

TO: SAC, HOUSTON DATE: 11-22-63

FROM: SA GRAHAM W. KITCHEL

SUBJECT: UNKNOWN SUBJECT;
ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT
JOHN F. KENNEDY

At 1:45 p.m. Mr. GEORGE H. W. BUSH, President of the Zapata Off-Shore Drilling Company, Houston, Texas, residence 5525 Briar, Houston, telephonically furnished the following information to writer by long distance telephone call from Tyler, Texas.

BUSH stated that he wanted to be kept confidential but wanted to furnish hearsay that he recalled hearing in recent weeks, the day and source unknown. He stated that one JAMES PARROTT has been talking of killing the President when he comes to Houston.

BUSH stated that PARROTT is possibly a student at the University of Houston and is active in political matters in this area. He stated that he felt Mrs. FAWLEY, telephone number SU 2-5239, or ARLINE SMITH, telephone number JA 9-9194 of the Harris County Republican Party Headquarters would be able to furnish additional information regarding the identity of PARROTT.

BUSH stated that he was proceeding to Dallas, Texas, would remain in the Sheraton-Dallas Hotel and return to his residence on 11-23-63. His office telephone number is CA 2-0395.

# # #

Gee. Why was Poppy Bush in Dallas when JFK was assassinated?

Could it be, he was on official business? I suspect he was on Secret Government business. After all, his eldest son bragged during his Texas Air National Guard and Harvard grad school days that his daddy was CIA.

Here's an FBI document from the same week of the assassination in which FBI Director J Edgar Hoover briefed one "Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency." Some strange coincidence there, wot?



Here's a transcript of the above:

Date: November 29, 1963

To: Director
Bureau of Intelligence and Research
Department of State

From: John Edgar Hoover, Director

Subject: ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY
NOVEMBER 22, 1963

Our Miami, Florida, Office on November 23, 1963, advised that the Office of Coordinator of Cuban Affairs in Miami advised that the Department of State feels some misguided anti-Castro group might capitalize on the present situation and undertake an unauthorized raid against Cuba, believing that the assassination of President John F. Kennedy might herald a change in U. S. policy, which is not true.

Our sources and informants familiar with Cuban matters in the Miami area advise that the general feeling in the anti-Castro Cuban community is one of stunned disbelief and, even among those who did not entirely agree with the President's policy concerning Cuba, the feeling is that the President's death represents a great loss not only to the U. S. but to all of Latin America. These sources know of no plans for unauthorized action against Cuba.

An informant who has furnished reliable information in the past and who is close to a small pro-Castro group in Miami has advised that these individuals are afraid that the assassination of the President may result in strong repressive measures being taken against them and, although pro-Castro in their feelings, regret the assassination.

The substance of the foregoing information was orally furnished to Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency and Captain William Edwards of the Defense Intelligence Agency on November 23, 1963, by Mr. W. T. Forsyth of this Bureau.

# # #

I do remember that GHWB was head of the CIA when the Church Committee was looking into the CIA assassination programs. He made things all friendly-like and turned what had been a serious hunt for truth under previous DCI Colby into another dog-and-pony show that was big on show and light on facts.

Regarding Dallas: Now I don't know if Poppy was a trigger man, was only there to watch what happened or what just happened to be there. I do know Poppy Bush has never explained these memos. He's never even admitted where he was the day JFK was killed.

Seeing how he would go on to become President, as would his dim son, I believe it's vitally important that we learn the Truth.

Why? The United States and the world haven't been the same since November 22, 1963. And not a single major player in the nation's mass media have stepped up and demanded a real investigation. So, it's up to us, We the People.

What's more, Poppy Bush sheltered mass-murdering jet-bombing terrorists like Luis Posada Carriles.

Small world. And very, very bad, filled with all manner of detractors for people who upset the apple cart like Julian Assange and real democrats like Orlando Letelier and Ronnie Karpen Moffit. You tell a couple lawyers and as many journos as you know about your story. The more the merrier, safer and better, as we used to say on DU.

[stevenleser]

131. Yep. nt

[Octafish]

188. Hey, stevenleser! Do you think it was fascist for the USA to invade Iraq?

Either time?

Did you know Bush Senior had to lie America into war in 1991, just like his son would in 2002?

What a coincidence!

Talking Poppy George Herbert Walker Bush, courtesy of Hill & Knowlton, back in 1991:



The Kuwait ambassador's daughter, committing perjury on behalf of the administration as she tells the US Congress she was a nurse at a Kuwaiti City hospital who saw the Iraqi soldiers take babies from their incubators and leave them on the cold, hard floor so they could steal the incubators for babes in Baghdad.

"If I wanted to lie, or if we wanted to lie, if we wanted to exaggerate, I wouldn't use my daughter to do so. I could easily buy other people to do it." -- Kuwait Ambassador

I wonder who he had to buy?

In war, some facts less factual

Some US assertions from the last war on Iraq still appear dubious.

By Scott Peterson, Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor SEPTEMBER 6, 2002

MOSCOW — When George H. W. Bush ordered American forces to the Persian Gulf – to reverse Iraq's August 1990 invasion of Kuwait – part of the administration case was that an Iraqi juggernaut was also threatening to roll into Saudi Arabia.

Citing top-secret satellite images, Pentagon officials estimated in mid–September that up to 250,000 Iraqi troops and 1,500 tanks stood on the border, threatening the key US oil supplier.

But when the St. Petersburg Times in Florida acquired two commercial Soviet satellite images of the same area, taken at the same time, no Iraqi troops were visible near the Saudi border – just empty desert.

"It was a pretty serious fib," says Jean Heller, the Times journalist who broke the story.

The White House is now making its case. to Congress and the public for another invasion of Iraq; President George W. Bush is expected to present specific evidence of the threat posed by Iraq during a speech to the United Nations next week.

CONTINUED...

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0906/p01s02-wosc.html

MORE: http://www.representativepress.org/LiesAboutIraq.html

I'm sure you knew all that, right, stevenleser?

[stevenleser]

190. Hey Octafish, you aren't hijacking this thread with unrelated stuff.

If you want my opinion on Iraq, all you have to do is google my name and Iraq war.

That isn't what this discussion is about.

[Octafish]

192. Should have known you'd dance around the question, stevenleser.

As for hijacking the thread, it's about WikiLeaks and Assange.

[stevenleser]

193. I'm not letting you hijack this. nt

[Octafish]

194. Declare victory and scoot-your usual cop-out for not knowing squat on the subject. LOL, stevenleser.

But before you ride off, know that WikiLeaks exposed the wars on Iraq for what they are -- money making opportunities for fascists and traitors. News to you, hah?

Wikileaks Release Suggests Stratfor Inside Info Plan with Goldman Sachs Exec

By Ryan Villarreal: Subscribe to Ryan's RSS feed
IBTimes.com
February 27, 2012 6:26 PM EST

WikiLeaks released more than 5 million e-mails Monday hacked from U.S.-based global intelligence firm Strategy Forecasting Inc. (Stratfor), revealing an alleged plan between the firm's CEO and a Goldman Sachs executive to set up an investment fund that would rely on inside information gathered by the company.

A September 2011 company-wide e-mail composed by Stratfor CEO George Friedman indicates that Goldman Sachs financial adviser and former Managing Director Shea Morenz was directly involved in the establishment of the investment fund StratCap.

"Shea Morenz provided us with two opportunities," wrote Friedman.

"First, he made an investment in Stratfor designed to give us the capital needed to build our staff and our marketing. Second, he proposed a new venture, StratCap, which would allow us to utilize the intelligence we were gathering about the world in a new but related venue -- an investment fund. Where we had previously advised other hedge funds. We would now have our own, itself fully funded by Shea."

CONTINUED...

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/305532/20120227/wikileaks-stratfor-stratcap-goldman-sachs-fund-julian.htm

That's on-topic, see? WikiLeaks exposing government criminality.

The personal stuff you do: the angst, woe-is-me, righteous indignation, etc., is the side show, stevenleser.

[stevenleser]

195. A google search on my name and Iraq will show I was on that long before you. No. nt

[Octafish]

197. Good for you! So, show where I hijacked this thread.

BTW: I just GOOGLED your name and WikiLeaks and Octafish and WikiLeaks...

stevenleser + wikileaks = 4,370 results

Octafish + wikileaks = 7,340 results

Need screen shots?

[stevenleser]

196. Here is a link.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/142834/message/1047272702/Reasons+for+attacking+Iraq+exposed+as+lies%2C+lies+and+damned+lies

Now that I have proven you wrong, you can have the conversation all to yourself, because you are now on ignore.

[Octafish]

200. Great, you were on the case, according to the dateline, anyway, in 2003.

You should put that in your DU Journal.

[AikidoSoul]

357. Octafish knows WikiLeaks is a reporting entity, a journal, that reveals lies to the world.

WikiLeaks revealed thousands of lies. This thread is about Julian Assange, a man who risked everything to publish thousands of lies that rocked the political systems in many countries including our own.

So continuing on that same theme, Octafish cited just one of the many HUGE lies that was contrived to push the buttons of anyone at all with a heart, unless he/she had stock in war profiteering corporations.

The iraqui Ambassador's daughter was just part of the many threads of evil lies told that were meant to trigger emotions to drive people to kill other people. The girl told the world that Kuwaitis entered an Iraqui hospital and snatched the babies, put them on the floor, and stole the incubators for themselves.

It was total bullshit. But the lie succeeded in its predicted goal. It infuraiated the sheeple Americans and their allies. It cinched their desire to drive our military men and women to go to war and die (and develop chronic illnesses) to make the war mongering war profiteers even richer than they already were.

Later it was discovered, that most so called normal people didn't want to know the truth after it was too late. It was just so painful. All those dead and dying military personnel. Reminds me of Jack Nicolson's scream at the attorney in the movie, "A Few Good Men." He screamed, "You want the truth? You can't TAKE the truth!"

stevenleser - You can't be so out of the loop as to not know that the Carlyle Group among others war mongering corporations, profits from war and from countless lies that are told leading up to war.

Unless you own stock there!$

Be a good boy and read Project For The New American Century, which was the buildup plain-to-see-for-any-idiot-who-can-read argument for the second Iraq war. Most sheeples could not, or would not, see the significance of that report, and probably most didn't bother to read it. The Bushes and even the Bin Laden family have profited from wars as they have been part of the Carlyle Group's major beneficiaries.

[AikidoSoul]

220. Thank you for posting this. It's amazing to me how many people are

bamboozled into thinking Assange is our enemy when he has shined the light on thousands of lies
that needed to be revealed.

The entire accusation of rape is a bogus, trumped up load of doo doo designed to get the knee-jerk reaction from those who NEED to believe that he raped those women. Even the women themselves admit that he did not!

If anyone really wanted to get to the truth, they would read the hundreds of reports and interviews on this topic in the international press.

One thing I would dispute, and that's the number of civilians who suffered "violent deaths" in Iraq between 2004 and 2009. There is no score keeping on this tragedy, but having read so much about this horror, I strongly suspect, but cannot prove, that the number is much higher.

Thank you Octafish. I admire your posts and the work you put into them.

[Octafish]

237. You are most welcome, AikidoSoul. Thank you for your excellent summation.

Agree regarding the number of innocent people killed on account of the warmongers and traitors who lied America into war on a nation that had NOTHING to do with 9-11.

In just one example: WikiLeaks and PFC Manning demonstrated the criminality of the US Government in the conduct of the war: Indiscriminate targeting and killing of civilians. The response? Jail the messengers.

Bradley Manning given 35-year prison term for passing files to WikiLeaks

• Manning to forfeit pay and to be dishonorably discharged
• Prosecution had requested Manning serve 60 years in jail
• Civil liberties campaigners lament 'sad day for all Americans'
• Follow the latest in our Bradley Manning live blog

by Paul Lewis
The Guardian, Aug. 21, 2013

EXCERPT...

Ben Wizner, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Speech, Privacy & Technology Project, said: "When a soldier who shared information with the press and public is punished far more harshly than others who tortured prisoners and killed civilians, something is seriously wrong with our justice system.

"A legal system that doesn't distinguish between leaks to the press in the public interest and treason against the nation will not only produce unjust results, but will deprive the public of critical information that is necessary for democratic accountability."

He added: "This is a sad day for Bradley Manning, but it's also a sad day for all Americans who depend on brave whistleblowers and a free press for a fully informed public debate."

Daniel Ellsberg, who faced charges under the Espionage Act for leaking the Pentagon Papers documenting the Vietnam War, said Manning "doesn't deserve to spend another day in jail".

"There are some that will not be deterred even by prospect of life in prison – I think that Manning was one of those," he said. "I think that Edward Snowden is another – he knows he faced the prospect of life in prison or even assassination. … This is an effort to minimise truth telling.""

"This is unprecedented," said Liza Goitein, who co-directs the Brennan Center for Justice's Liberty and National Security Program. "It is dramatically longer than the longest sentence ever served for disclosing classified information to the media, which was two years."

WikiLeaks, however, hailed the sentence as a "significant strategic victory". In a statement posted on the organisation's website, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange called the trial "an affront to basic concepts of Western justice." Assange said "the Obama administration is demonstrating that there is no place in its system for people of conscience and principle" and warned "there will be a thousand more Bradley Mannings."

CONTINUED...

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/21/bradley-manning-35-years-prison-wikileaks-sentence

Except, there haven't been "a thousand more Bradley Mannings." There have been some, but most people in a position to see the criminality have been silenced by what the US government has done to Manning...and Kiriakou and Drake and anybody else with a drop of democracy.

PS: Please know that your friendship means the world to me, AikidoSoul. These subjects not only are burdensome to carry, they are maddening to contemplate. Without your help and understanding, it would be impossible.

[AikidoSoul]

265. It's close to 2 a.m. on the east coast and I just saw your post #237 which blew my mind

like most of your posts do.

Thank you for saying that you value my friendship. It has been a very lonely experience for me on DU so far. I've admired your posts for a long time so I really do mean it when I say that you've made me feel joyful.

This Assange topic has me very concerned and I wish I could stay up even later to deal with the posts coming from a few people that seem to be more badly brain damaged than I am.

But it's time for bed.

Again....thank you sincerely.

[brooklynite]

93. As much a some here would like to believe that "they" would "do anything"...

...can anyone explain why SWEDEN, a nation that has stayed out of all the foreign entanglements we apparently want to cover up, would get involved in this conspiracy theory?

[hifiguy]

98. Intelligence agencies always cooperate with each other.

Sweden is not a member of NATO, but it maintains close ties with NATO, and US intelligence agencies have worldwide contacts. Assange was in Sweden so MI6 and the CIA put the squeeze on the Swedes. Were they supposed to muscle the Italians?

[brooklynite]

101. You'll understand my reluctance to accept this airtight case without some actual evidence...

[hifiguy]

104. It's a hypothesis based on the known practices of intelligence agencies.

And it fits the facts rather well given the handful of assumptions I stated upthread in Post 95. An educated guess, but a plausible one, I think.

[stevenleser]

125. If the CIA had been engaged on the Assange issue, they would have had someone shoot him.

While intricate conspiracy theories sound exciting, if someone is deemed a national security threat big enough that a country has to engage it's CIA or GRU or MSS, or Mossad or MI6, etc. against them, 99.99% of the time they are simply going to have someone shoot that person.

Those agencies don't spend time dealing in intricate and difficult conspiracies unless there is no other option to get done what needs to get done. Contrary to what some believe those agencies all have limited manpower and don't have time to waste on nonsense.

Assange is simply not that big of a threat to the US to waste time on an intricate plan to discredit him. CIA is much more concerned about what Russia and China and Iran and North Korea are doing and what ISIS and Al Qaeda and their various affiliates are doing and just trying to get its hands around that takes every piece of manpower the CIA has and then some.

[elias49]

161. You admit that the intelligence industry is criminal then.

That's a good beginning.

[stevenleser]

163. No, I don't. Criminal implies against the law. The laws here would be international.

Very little international law exists regarding intelligence agencies and their clandestine operations.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1003225

http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=peyton_cooke

http://www.faqs.org/espionage/In-Int/Intelligence-and-International-Law.html

This probably makes sense since the worlds 50 largest countries all have intelligence agencies and they all had a hand in creating international law and the UN and they would hardly make their own activities illegal.

The closest thing that comes to it is from the third link above:

Article 24 of the 1907 Hague Land Warfare Regulations notes that "measures necessary for obtaining information about the enemy and the country are considered permissible"—a recognition of the fact that nations will conduct intelligence operations in wartime. Protocol I, Article 46 states that military personnel gathering intelligence while in uniform are to be accorded the treatment due other combatants, but expressly withholds these protections from undercover operatives or agents captured while in the act of conducting espionage. Article 47 similarly exempts mercenaries—those who fail to meet standards of lawful combatants established by Article 44 of 1907 Conference—from the rights of POWs. A similar provision exists in Geneva Convention III.

-------------------------------------------
One thing international law makes clear is that every country has the right to its own defense and to its own national security. Countries, organizations and persons that threaten the national security of a country would be an exception to most international law against actions being taken. In the case of organizations like Al-Qaeda and ISIS, multiple UN Resolutions have been put forth that expressly call those organizations criminal and terrorist organizations and make it a violation of international law to help them in any way.

[elias49]

168. But you speculated that they would have simply shot him dead

had they the chance. Would that in itself not be a criminal act

I'm not overly impressed with your ability - might I say eagerness - to cite official documents. They strike me as irrelevant
to the particulars. They're broad and boilerplate

If the CIA had had they the opportunity to shoot Assange dead, woud you condone that. Because of complex intnl treaty gobbledegook?

[stevenleser]

170. I said that someone they identified as an actual national security threat would be shot dead

and if Assange had been thusly identified, that is what would have happened to him.

And don't criticize my posted materials when you have posted nothing in the way of links and backup. When you have links that are better than mine, then you can have something to say about my links. Fact is, there isn't much international law about intelligence activities.

All of your questions you have the answer to from previous posts. Which brings me to your last question. No, Assange is not a threat to US National Security, which is why the CIA wasn't involved in this at all. In other words, no, the CIA should not shoot him.

Get it?

[elias49]

171. I don't come to these threads with the express purpose

of defending the intelligence industry. If I did, I'd have material right at hand as do you. I come to these threads with my heart and so appear "ill prepared"
Shame on YOU,
Sir.

With all due respect...

[stevenleser]

208. Yes, it's so terrible that I actually know what I am talking about. You've shamed me.

[AikidoSoul]

376. ".... SWEDEN, a nation that has stayed out of all the foreign entanglements...."

Sweden's image of being neutral is not what it seems.

Examples:

Assange’s accusers’ (both of them) are represented by the Swedish law firm Borgström and Bodström. One of the partners, Thomas Bodström, was a former Swedish Minister of Justice in 2001. He helped grease the wheels for a 2001 CIA rendition, enabling the CIA to fly two asylum-seekers from Sweden to Egypt. In Egypt they were tortured.

http://markcrispinmiller.com/2011/02/eight-big-problems-with-the-case-against-assange-must-read-by-naomi-wolf/


Sweden's alleged neutrality is a convenient image to convey, as the public remembers that image and tends to forget how it does get involved with sensitive political issues.

A recent example is that they easily convinced the US and her partners of Sweden’s neutrality when providing intelligence to our government on the Iranian nuclear project.

Keep in mind that they're are a member of NATO and depend on the US for military protection. There are also strong economic benefits derived from their close relationship with the USA.

[Octafish]

47. Assange and WikiLeaks spilled the beans on War Inc.

Per the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA):

In October 2010, WikiLeaks released a package of almost 400,000 documents called the Iraq War Logs in coordination with major commercial media organizations. US officials confirmed that this was the largest leak of US military secrets in history. The "war logs" showed alleged evidence of torture that was ignored, and that there were more than 109,000 violent deaths between 2004 and 2009 including 66,081 civilians.2

http://www.ifla.org/publications/what-is-the-effect-of-wikileaks-for-freedom-of-information

Gee, hifiguy. That's a lot different from what CIABCNNBCBSFoxGOPworks have been saying.

[hifiguy]

50. Thank you Octafish.

This is the ONLY bedrock issue here. I knew you had the proof of all this.

[Octafish]

106. Thank you for a most important OP and thread, hifiguy!

The Siege of Julian Assange is a Farce (John Pilger)

The siege of Knightsbridge is a farce. For two years, an exaggerated, costly police presence around the Ecuadorean embassy in London has served no purpose other than to flaunt the power of the state. Their quarry is an Australian charged with no crime, a refugee from gross injustice whose only security is the room given him by a brave South American country. His true crime is to have initiated a wave of truth-telling in an era of lies, cynicism and war.

by John Pilger
Center for Research on Globalisation, Nov. 16, 2014

The persecution of Julian Assange must end. Even the British government clearly believes it must end. On 28 October, the deputy foreign minister, Hugo Swire, told Parliament he would “actively welcome” the Swedish prosecutor in London and “we would do absolutely everything to facilitate that.” The tone was impatient.

The Swedish prosecutor, Marianne Ny, has refused to come to London to question Assange about allegations of sexual misconduct in Stockholm in 2010 – even though Swedish law allows for it and the procedure is routine for Sweden and the UK. The documentary evidence of a threat to Assange’s life and freedom from the United States – should he leave the embassy – is overwhelming. On May 14 this year, US court files revealed that a “multi subject investigation” against Assange was “active and ongoing.”

Ny has never properly explained why she will not come to London, just as the Swedish authorities have never explained why they refuse to give Assange a guarantee that they will not extradite him on to the US under a secret arrangement agreed between Stockholm and Washington. In December 2010, the Independent revealed that the two governments had discussed his onward extradition to the US before the European Arrest Warrant was issued.

Perhaps an explanation is that, contrary to its reputation as a liberal bastion, Sweden has drawn so close to Washington that it has allowed secret CIA “renditions” – including the illegal deportation of refugees. The rendition and subsequent torture of two Egyptian political refugees in 2001 was condemned by the UN Committee against Torture, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch; the complicity and duplicity of the Swedish state are documented in successful civil litigation and WikiLeaks cables. In the summer of 2010, Assange had been in Sweden to talk about WikiLeaks revelations of the war in Afghanistan – in which Sweden had forces under US command.

The Americans are pursuing Assange because WikiLeaks exposed their epic crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq: the wholesale killing of tens of thousands of civilians, which they covered up; and their contempt for sovereignty and international law, as demonstrated vividly in their leaked diplomatic cables.

SNIP...

According to documents released by Snowden, Assange is on a “Manhunt target list”. Washington’s bid to get him, say Australian diplomatic cables, is “unprecedented in scale and nature”. In Alexandria, Virginia, a secret grand jury has spent four years attempting to contrive a crime for which Assange can be prosecuted. This is not easy. The First Amendment to the US Constitution protects publishers, journalists and whistleblowers. As a presidential candidate in 2008, Barack Obama lauded whistleblowers as “part of a healthy democracy [and they] must be protected from reprisal”. Under President Obama, more whistleblowers have been prosecuted than under all other US presidents combined. Even before the verdict was announced in the trial of Chelsea Manning, Obama had pronounced the whisletblower guilty.

“Documents released by WikiLeaks since Assange moved to England,” wrote Al Burke, editor of the online Nordic News Network, an authority on the multiple twists and dangers facing Assange, “clearly indicate that Sweden has consistently submitted to pressure from the United States in matters relating to civil rights. There is every reason for concern that if Assange were to be taken into custody by Swedish authorities, he could be turned over to the United States without due consideration of his legal rights.”

There are signs that the Swedish public and legal community do not support prosecutor’s Marianne Ny’s intransigence. Once implacably hostile to Assange, the Swedish press has published headlines such as: “Go to London, for God’s sake.”

CONTINUED...

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-siege-of-julian-assange-is-a-farce/5414340

Now that the statute of limitations are up the prosecutor name Ny got busy blaming Assange for not talking. Nice work, the smear artiste, for those who can stomach it.

[hifiguy]

110. The opinion of a DUer I respect as much as I do you

means much to me. The querulous and logic-proof yowling of the blinkered naysayers means nothing. To you, sir!

[Octafish]

118. I am honored.

To you, sir!

And to them what are new to the Truth about Them: WikiLeaks showed the world how US government officials used their positions to advance their corporate chums. This also is the ultimate reality of all the NSA spying and wall-to-wall surveillance at home, they know Who's Who, Who Knows What and Whom, and How They Connect.

For instance, sometimes a fortune rests on a mere scrap of information, like in a "Fistful of Dollars."

CIA moonlights in corporate world

In the midst of two wars and the fight against Al Qaeda, the CIA is offering operatives a chance to peddle their expertise to private companies on the side — a policy that gives financial firms and hedge funds access to the nation’s top-level intelligence talent, POLITICO has learned.

In one case, these active-duty officers moonlighted at a hedge-fund consulting firm that wanted to tap their expertise in “deception detection,” the highly specialized art of telling when executives may be lying based on clues in a conversation.

The never-before-revealed policy comes to light as the CIA and other intelligence agencies are once again under fire for failing to “connect the dots,” this time in the Christmas Day bombing plot on Northwest Flight 253.

SNIP...

But the close ties between active-duty and retired CIA officers at one consulting company show the degree to which CIA-style intelligence gathering techniques have been employed by hedge funds and financial institutions in the global economy.

The firm is called Business Intelligence Advisors, and it is based in Boston. BIA was founded and is staffed by a number of retired CIA officers, and it specializes in the arcane field of “deception detection.” BIA’s clients have included Goldman Sachs and the enormous hedge fund SAC Capital Advisors, according to spokesmen for both firms.

CONTINUED...

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/32290.html#ixzz0eIFPhHBh

Then there's the signature tradition of playing both sides off the middle, like selling rifles to both the Allies and the Central Powers during World War I, or the bounty hunters in "For a Few Dollars More" getting one inside to work out.

Stratfor: executive boasted of 'trusted former CIA cronies'

By Alex Spillius, Diplomatic Correspondent
9:08PM GMT 28 Feb 2012
The Telegraph

A senior executive with the private intelligence firm Stratfor boasted to colleagues about his "trusted former CIA cronies" and promised to "see what I can uncover" about a classified FBI investigation, according to emails released by the WikiLeaks.

Fred Burton, vice president of intelligence at the Texas firm, also informed members of staff that he had a copy of the confidential indictment on Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks.

The second batch of five million internal Stratfor emails obtained by the Anonymous computer hacking group revealed that the company has high level sources within the United States and other governments, runs a network of paid informants that includes embassy staff and journalists and planned a hedge fund, Stratcap, based on its secret intelligence.

SNIP...

Mr Assange labelled the company as a "private intelligence Enron", in reference to the energy giant that collapsed after a false accounting scandal.

CONTINUED...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9111784/Stratfor-executive-boasted-of-trusted-former-CIA-cronies.html

Then, there's Booz Allen, NSA's go-to private spyhaus, vacuums and filters the right stuff for Carlyle Group, a buy-partisan business which always seems to know where and what to bomb and make a buck, but the lines between sides turned out be fuzzy and amorphous nebula-like -- like in "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly."

The Knights of the Revolving Door

When War is Swell: the Carlyle Group and the Middle East at War

by JEFFREY ST. CLAIR
CounterPunch, Weekend Edition September 6-8, 2013

Paris.

A couple of weeks ago, in a dress rehearsal for her next presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton, the doyenne of humanitarian interventionism, made a pit-stop at the Carlyle Group to brief former luminaries of the imperial war rooms about her shoot-first-don’t-ask-questions foreign policy.

For those of you who have put the playbill of the Bush administration into a time capsule and buried it beneath the compost bin, the Carlyle Group is essentially a hedge fund for war-making and high tech espionage. They are the people who brought you the Iraq war and all those intrusive niceties of Homeland Security. Call them the Knights of the Revolving Door, many of Carlyle’s executives and investors having spent decades in the Pentagon, the CIA or the State Department, before cashing in for more lucrative careers as war profiteers. They are now licking their chops at the prospect for an all-out war against Syria, no doubt hoping that the conflagration will soon spread to Lebanon, Jordan and, the big prize, Iran.

For a refresher course on the sprawling tentacles of the Carlyle Group, here’s an essay that first appeared in CounterPunch’s print edition in 2004. Sadly, not much has changed in the intervening years, except these feted souls have gotten much, much richer. – JSC

Across all fronts, Bush’s war deteriorates with stunning rapidity. The death count of American soldiers killed in Iraq will soon top 1000, with no end in sight. The members of the handpicked Iraqi Governor Council are being knocked off one after another. Once loyal Shia clerics, like Ayatollah Sistani, are now telling the administration to pull out or face a nationalist insurgency. The trail of culpability for the abuse, torture and murder of Iraqi detainees seems to lead inexorably into the office of Donald Rumsfeld. The war for Iraqi oil has ended up driving the price of crude oil through the roof. Even Kurdish leaders, brutalized by the Ba’athists for decades, are now saying Iraq was a safer place under their nemesis Saddam Hussein. Like Medea whacking her own kids, the US turned on its own creation, Ahmed Chalabi, raiding his Baghdad compound and fingering him as an agent of the ayatollahs of Iran. And on and on it goes.

Still not all of the president’s men are in a despairing mood. Amid the wreckage, there remain opportunities for profit and plunder. Halliburton and Bechtel’s triumphs in Iraq have been chewed over for months. Less well chronicled is the profiteering of the Carlyle Group, a company with ties that extend directly into the Oval Office itself.

Even Pappy Bush stands in line to profit handsomely from his son’s war making. The former president is on retainer with the Carlyle Group, the largest privately held defense contractor in the nation. Carlyle is run by Frank Carlucci, who served as the National Security advisor and Secretary of Defense under Ronald Reagan. Carlucci has his own embeds in the current Bush administration. At Princeton, his college roommate was Donald Rumsfeld. They’ve remained close friends and business associates ever since. When you have friends like this, you don’t need to hire lobbyists..

Bush Sr. serves as a kind of global emissary for Carlyle. The ex-president doesn’t negotiate arms deals; he simply opens the door for them, a kind of high level meet-and-greet. His special area of influence is the Middle East, primarily Saudi Arabia, where the Bush family has extensive business and political ties. According to an account in the Washington Post, Bush Sr. earns around $500,000 for each speech he makes on Carlyle’s behalf.

One of the Saudi investors lured to Carlyle by Bush was the BinLaden Group, the construction conglomerate owned by the family of Osama bin Laden. According to an investigation by the Wall Street Journal, Bush convinced Shafiq Bin Laden, Osama’s half brother, to sink $2 million of BinLaden Group money into Carlyle’s accounts. In a pr move, the Carlyle group cut its ties to the BinLaden Group in October 2001.

CONTINUED...

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/09/06/when-war-is-swell-the-carlyle-group-and-the-middle-east-at-war/

This barely scratches the surface. The reality is that underneath what shows for public navigators is one enormous iceberg made from blood-red ice, invisible to the proles and serfs who are doing their best to keep afloat in a frozen sea of austerity, endless war and debt servitude. And these are, by far, the wealthiest times in human history.

It's obvious what the agenda is, if informed. Hence the asshats and emoticons.

[AikidoSoul]

155. Thank you for having a highly functioning brain with the capacity to organize

information and context.

I love you.

[Octafish]

187. GOP Spies at Work on Us ... as in 'We the People' Us.

Gee. If the Roberts Court didn't have to decide it, I guess this would be illegal.

CIFA 2.0 Back in the Outsourcing Business

By: emptywheel Thursday April 21, 2011 9:30 am

Remember the Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA)? Here’s how I described it back in 2007.

CIFA is, along with the National Security Letters Congress is now cracking down on, probably the biggest abuse of civil rights and privacy BushCo has hatched up. It was designed to gather intelligence on threats to defense installments in the United States–to try to collect information (in the TALON database) on threatening people scoping out domestic bases. But it ended up focusing on peace activists and the lefty blogosphere’s own Jesus’ General. 70 percent of CIFA’s employees are contractors, a figure that makes it a prime candidate for politicized contracting scandal.

Among the contractors spying on Americans was MZM, one of the companies that bribed Duke Cunningham. Prosecutors in that case started investigating MZM’s CIFA contracts in May 2006. Three months after that, the top two managers at CIFA, who had directed CIFA keep sending MZM contracts, resigned suddenly. When DOD’s Inspector General tried to investigate CIFA in 2007, it discovered (it claimed) that the entire CIFA database had been destroyed in June 2006, just as prosecutors were closing in on those contracts.

[font color="green"]Later, in 2008, just as CIFA was claiming it couldn’t publicly reveal its unclassified contracts, we learned that Stephen Cambone (who had led one of the inquiries into CIFA), had won a contract from it, sort of a payoff for not finding anything, I guess.[/font color]

Later that year, DOD “disestablished” CIFA.

Or rather, they renamed it, calling it the Defense Counterintelligence and Human Intelligence Center. Then, last year, we learned that database DOD claimed had been destroyed in 2006 really hadn’t been, and CIFA 2.0 was getting back in the business of keeping a database of information on big threats to the US like Quakers and bloggers.

CONTINUED w/LINKS...

http://www.emptywheel.net/tag/cifa/

People who think this is old news are missing a very big boat. Freedom of the Press was something We the People just took for granted, and now that the Press is pretty much owned by six corporations, including Rupert Murdoch, we don't hear much of what we need to know. Hence, DU.

PS: Thank you AikidoSoul! As an old guy who doesn't attract much attention except on payday, that means a lot. Coming from you, that means the world!

PPS: Back at ya!

[AikidoSoul]

354. Free press is eroding dramatically in my lifetime

Your quote:

People who think this is old news are missing a very big boat. Freedom of the Press was something We the People just took for granted, and now that the Press is pretty much owned by six corporations, including Rupert Murdoch, we don't hear much of what we need to know. Hence, DU.

It is a very big boat and is slowly but surely driftng away.

Recently I contacted a friend who used to be a hotdog investigative reporter for the Miami Herald, asking him whether he could help me get some of his smarter journalists to look into something I think is very important.

He simply told me that very few newpapers do any "real" investigative journalism anymore.

The erosion has been slow but now it seems we are in dire trouble.

And Faux Noise has created an entire generation of people who seem to hate the truth.

I don't know what we can do to change this. I do know that I agonize over it.

Am feeling very sad about it.

I wish I could remember what happend to me growing up that made me a truth lover. Was it all those books about Knights in Shining Armor? Was it ASEOPS fables? Was it the Catholic schools I went to all my life? The convent? Reading Dr. Suess?

And aren't the greatest stories and movies about pushing back against some great evil and finding Truth and Justice at the end?

What happpened? Don't people take that seriously anymore?

Help!

[Octafish]

355. Ours may be an Associative Universe...

This is probably old hat to you, AikidoSoul...



Dr. Jacques Vallee says we may live in an "Associative Universe," one in which our minds act as a rudder, guiding us toward destinations we have pre-considered. An astronomer and computer scientist by training, he was among the first to apply computers to analyzing the UFO phenomenon when an assistant to the late Dr. J. Allen Hynek of Project BLUEBOOK fame and "swamp gas" notoriety.

Vallee describes the "Associative Universe" in detail in "Messengers of Deception," a study of UFO cults and people who manipulate followers and what it means to the greater society as a whole. He had been studying a contactee group called, iirc, "The Order of Melchizedek" for several months. On an unrelated matter, Vallee flew to L.A. for a conference and hopped aboard a cab. When he finally got to his room, he looked at his receipt for the cab ride and it was signed, iirc, John Melchizedek. Vallee looked in the phone book and he was the only Melchizedek in town.

The coincidence made him think that, perhaps the universe is organized along the lines of a series of information events. Time and space, rather than acting as a phonograph needle laid down at the beginning of track one and coursing through to the end of the side, may be a series of seemingly unconnected experiences woven together by our consciousness. Thus, our awareness serves to pick up the needle and put it down at different places on the album. A similar situation may exist in data storage systems, where key words help retrieve information faster than having to go through an entire pile of data to find the needle in the infohaystack. For us, our minds act as a sort of rudder, guiding us more often to the visualized destination.

http://www.fiu.edu/~mizrachs/UFO-info-age.html

This is an amazing universe. Perhaps important thoughts are like the clouds moving across the clear blue sky of the Universal Mind. So, please keep thinking about where it is we need to go. The world may move in that direction. Whenever possible, it really does make sense to visualize peace, justice, understanding and love. It could hasten the day when this becomes the kind of universe good people deserve.

PS: Here's an OP that may shed some light on what we need to do in the meantime:

Wall Street DESTROYED the Newspaper Unions and We ALL Suffer for It

You probably haven't read it, but you and your friend at the Herald certainly know what it's about.

PPS: When I was a cub reporter on the night cops beat, Edna Buchanan was my role model.

[MisterP]

92. it doesn't even have to pan out to taint his name permanently--one of those "you never CAN tell

if there's not something to the accusation"

sometimes they stick (Seattle, that Libyan refugee? going to jail, the holdup on the LACMTA Expo Line), sometimes they don't (Hirsi Ali, Andy Young saying WalMart was Black America's last great hope)

[WillyT]

100. K & R !!!

[hifiguy]

112. Back atcha, Willy!

[Oilwellian]

114. Great piece, hifiguy

Most women who are raped, do not continue to party with their rapist, nor do they tweet how cool and smart their rapist is after they were allegedly raped.

[jwirr]

115. K&R

[cemaphonic]

117. That's some epic length rape apology there

If the accusations are so manifestly phony that you can deduce this over the internet, then he should have no trouble beating the rap and moving on with his life. Especially when rape cases are notoriously hard to prove (doubly so in a case like this where there isn't likely to be much evidence beyond verbal testimony).

As long as Assange is acting like a fugitive from justice, I'll keep thinking of him as such.

[hifiguy]

124. Oh, brother.

Can't even see the big picture of the forest because of your fixation on one dubious tree.

[cemaphonic]

132. The spy novel stuff was much more entertaining than vague metaphors

More of that please.

[hifiguy]

136. Do a little reading about the history of the CIA.

I recommend starting with DU's own Octafish. Then Steven Kinzer's "Overthrow."

And here's a catalog of sixty yearsof CIA atrocities:http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/CIAtimeline.html

Reality and history are what they are.

[stevenleser]

141. And in your link, there is nothing close to what you are alleging in the last 40 or so years.

That is a big problem with you contention.

[randome]

150. Assange's history is more recent. He admitted to the accusations.

How does that square with your completely evidence-free conspiracy theory?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[Cleita]

127. Thanks for some sober common sense about this. eom

[hifiguy]

129. The first question to ask is ALWAYS "Who benefits from this?"

If answered honestly it almost never points one wrong.

And that's all I did in the OP.

Thanks!

[wildbilln864]

139. k & r & thanks! n/t

[malokvale77]

140. Thanks hifiguy

I had no doubt the same people would jump to posting the same tiresome crap that always gets posted whenever the name "Julian Assange" (or Edward Snowden) gets mentioned.

I was not disappointed. Thankfully there still exists many who recognize propaganda when we see and/or hear it.

I've often wondered what it takes to become such a tool.

Good post.

[randome]

144. The 'tiresome crap' being that poor widdle Julian is being treated unfairly.

You know he admitted to the accusations, right? Some hero.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[hifiguy]

182. It's a simple binary distinction.

And it cuts across humanity. There are fervent believers and there are questioning skeptics. I am one of nature's skeptics. Always have been, since I was a wee lad.

Skeptics ask why, believers say I know why and don't confuse me with questions and logic.

What I find absolutely fascinating on this thread is that people who would generally be profoundly skeptical about most pronouncements by powerful officials (let us call one G W Bush for fun) and would suspect them of hiding the truth are so effortlessly gulled into an unquestioning state of absolute belief here. They respond the same way that fundies do when a bullshit artist like Cruz or Santorum says something that they want to hear despite its obviously dubious nature. Same thought process at work. It puzzles me, truly.

Perhaps it's confirmation bias of some
kind. It doesn't speak well of anyone to fall for this and reject logical, plausible alternative explanations and shows a clear suspension of critical thinking, never a good thing.

[truebluegreen]

143. Thanks, hifiguy. Excellent post. nt

[elias49]

146. Bravo. Well said and sadly true.

I met a man around 15 years ago who had worked for the CIA as a Russian specialist during Cold War days. It took some time to get to know him and for him to trust me, but after a while he began to tell me some stories about his life with the Company.
He left the agency in the early 80s, disgruntled and disturbed with some of the tactics he was compelled to use. He was disturbed by the way people were treated in his profession. And after he left began the hounding that would cost his wife her sanity, and him any possibility of gainful employment. Twice he was 'hospitalized' against his will. One tactic that was used against him in the early years was just the kind of bullshit that was used on Julian Assange. 'George' - not his real name - was repeatedly presented with "buttons" - attractive young women - in a poorly disguised attempt to catch him in a compromising situation. He never confided in me whether he ever succumbed to the trap. But it went on for years.
There were many other tactics and tools used to harrass the man who decided he didnt want to do the dirty tricks any more. But, apparently, you just don't leave the company amicably. They own you, your history, your life.

George just dropped off the map a year and a half ago.

[AikidoSoul]

148. Kicking and recommending this highly educational thread

Thank you HiFiGuy!

[markpkessinger]

156. Superb OP!

Thank you!

[lordsummerisle]

159. Thanks k&r n/t

[Liberal_Dog]

162. I Have No Doubt That Spooks Have An Arsenal Of Dirty Tricks

But, even if what happened in Sweden was a proverbial "honey trap", Julian Assange is not absolved IMHO.

After all, Assange did walk right into it. He has to take responsibility.

If Assange had kept it zipped, then there is no "honey trap".

Your hypothesis about what happened could very well be true, but, even so, I just can't say that I feel all that sorry for Julian Assange.

[elias49]

164. That's not as important as what he revealed. That's key.

The question you ought to ask yourself, respectfully, is whether his revelations were important.

[AikidoSoul]

176. So does that mean that heroes should never have sex, or get erections?

Are you nuts?

We are all human.

Let's get over it, O.K?

It's not like he was cheating on his wife that he separated from in 1999.

Assange revealed things that the whole world should know... and I'm appalled that so many DUers are so ignorant of the kinds of dirty tricks that happen to activists.

[Liberal_Dog]

228. Oh, FFS

You think I have some hangup about sex?

All that I am saying is that a target such as Assange needs to be absolutely sure that he can trust whoever he decides to have sex with.

[AikidoSoul]

232. Have no idea why you would think that I would think you have a hangup about sex!

We don't even know each other --- urr... intimately.

And while you claim that "....Assange needs to be absolutely sure that he can trust whoever he decides to have sex with"..... I ask you. Is that a reasonable request?

There is an old saying in many different cultures and languages that essentially says this:

"When the penis is erect, the brains turn to dust."

It is considered an old wisdom saying thousands of years old.

Have we evolved beyond that?

[LittleBlue]

180. Excellent thread

[Blue_Tires]

191. You ought to write novels...

Very entertaining...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

206. Well said. K&R

[Juicy_Bellows]

244. Very well said - Thank you sir!

And if you cannot see the logic of this argument, the overwhelming probability that it is true, and how intelligence agencies work in the real world, there is, simply put, no hope for you. You are hopelessly and irredeemably blind and deaf to the nature of reality and your words are worthless.

That right there - the fights up thread show who is who. Anyone new to DU, like me, can garner a lot about those that post here by this very thread.

I am sure someone much more intelligent than me can explain the correlation between Hillary supporters and Assange haters. Any takers?

Edit - I mean supporters and haters here on DU not out in the real world. I am sure plenty of Hillary supporters outside of DU (and perhaps a few inside) are well meaning people.

KICK!

[hifiguy]

245. Take my word fo it

The relationship between HRH supporters and Assange trashers is very nearly 1:1.

[Juicy_Bellows]

248. It certainly appears to be that way.

Cheers!

[KoKo]

250. Really appreciate this post "hifiguy!"

So glad to see your well reasoned, informative post about Assange and why he has been pursued in such a vicious way.

Those of us who have kept ourselves informed about him understand what you say and support him. The naysayers have their own feelings about him which for whatever reason seems to deny that he could be innocent...or even acknowledge how weak the charges and the actions of the Swedish Court were--even when the information about his whole legal case is put before them time and time again.

[struggle4progress]

251. Saint Julian had his day (lasting a year and a half) in the UK courts and lost. Similarly,

he has lost in the Swedish courts, in attempts to overturn the outstanding arrest warrant. Nobody seems to have produced any evidence that the rulings against him result from some corruption of judicial independence in Sweden and the UK

Saint Julian himself, of course, has gradually convinced many of his supporters that he's strange and unstable. Again and again, persons and organizations, that originally stood with him, have dropped away for various reasons

I have no idea what the true story of his Swedish encounters is, but his own accounts suggest he is a shallow misogynist. It is possible to wonder if perhaps there would have been no story here at all, had he been less unpleasant to his partners in his casual copulations, but there's no real use speculating on this matter: the task, of sorting out the facts, now lies with the Swedish courts

The grandiose conspiracy fantasies, associated with the Swedish extradition story, have produced no interesting insights at all, although there has been adequate time to explore the claims. So that's a sterile avenue that no one will waste time considering further

[AikidoSoul]

256. You are wrong. He did NOT lose in the Swedish Courts and he hasn't even been charged for God's sake

https://justice4assange.com/

Statement by JULIAN ASSANGE upon hearing the expiry of 3 allegations

I am extremely disappointed. There was no need for any of this. I am an innocent man. I haven’t even been charged. From the beginning I offered a simple solution. Come to the embassy to take my statement or promise not to send me to the United States. This Swedish official refused both. She even refused a written statement. Now she has managed to avoid hearing my side of the story entirely. This is beyond incompetence. I am strong but the cost to my family is unacceptable. Even though I have been improperly treated, I would like to thank the many people in Sweden and the UK who have been very understanding of the wrong which has been done to me and my family.

GAVIN MACFADYEN and SUSAN BENN, Julian Assange Defence Committee

"This is a severe disappointment. Assange has never been charged in Sweden or the UK. The US Department of Justice is trying to prosecute him for "espionage". This is the reason he was given asylum by Ecuador. He has been confined to the premises of Ecuador’s embassy in London, unable to see his family, because the UK and Sweden refuse him safe passage to Ecuador. This collapse of part of the Swedish preliminary investigation in no way allows him to leave the embassy of Ecuador. He cannot leave, because of the risk of arrest by the United Kingdom on behalf of the United States. The UK has stated its intention to arrest Assange even if the Swedish preliminary investigation is completely withdrawn.

Contrary to the statement of the Swedish prosecutor today, in no way has Assange or Ecuador obstructed the progression of the Swedish preliminary investigation. Swedish authorities have for three years been offered the option of taking Assange’s statement at the embassy, and they have refused. Assange has also offered to go to Sweden if the authorities agreed not to transfer him to the United States, and they have refused. This failure has been rebuked by the highest court in Sweden. It has been condemned by 59 human rights organisations in a submission to the United Nations. While the Assange case has stagnated, 44 other people have been questioned by Swedish authorities in the UK during the same period.

In recent weeks, despite Ecuador’s requests to enter talks about the legal status of the interview, the Swedish authorities have dragged their feet and refused to discuss the matter. It is an outrage that the Swedish authorities now seek to blame Ecuador or Assange for this. By failing to take Assange’s statement at the embassy, the Swedish authorities have deprived him of the right to answer false allegations against him that have been widely circulated in the media, but for which he has not been charged. As the case expires, that deprivation is now becoming permanent, and formal resolutions to the predicament are disappearing. Therefore while a particularly shambolic episode in Swedish justice may be coming to a close, the denial of Julian Assange’s liberty continues.

Gavin MacFadyen and Susan Benn

[struggle4progress]

257. He's been back and forth in the Swedish courts trying to get the warrant overturned,

and he's lost there again and again

The Swedish Supreme Court has denied WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's latest appeal to dismiss an arrest warrant for allegations of sexual assault ...
Swedish court rejects Julian Assange's appeal against sexual assault
By Naomi Ng, for CNN
Updated 4:55 AM ET, Tue May 12, 2015

Stockholm’s appeal court has rejected a demand by Julian Assange’s lawyers to lift the arrest warrant against him ...
Julian Assange: Swedish court rejects appeal to lift arrest warrant
David Crouch in Gothenburg
Thursday 20 November 2014 09.48 EST

Lawyers for Julian Assange said they would appeal after a Stockholm judge rejected their challenge to the warrant for his arrest ...
Julian Assange: Swedish judge rules to uphold arrest warrant
Claire Phipps and Ben Quinn
Wednesday 16 July 2014 13.47 EDT

[AikidoSoul]

264. He has not physically been back and forth in the Swedish courts

Last edited Tue Aug 18, 2015, 06:05 PM - Edit history (1)

but did try to resolve a basic issue which is that he WAS NEVER INTERVIEWED BY THE SWEDISH PROSECUTOR AND SHE REPEATEDLY REFUSED TO DO SO. Without an interview and statements by the plaitiffs, he cannot go on trial. Plus he doesn't want to go to Sweden because of fear of being extradited to the USA. Karl Rove worked with the plaintiff's attorney's firm on the case... which anybody should consider highly suspect.

I do wish you would read the legal documents from Sweden that complain that the Swedish prosecutor refused to question him in Sweden, and also in England.

They maintained that her position to leave Assange in Limbo is "unfair". It's a tactic.

Leaving him twisting in the winds of uncertainty allows people to project all kinds of evil things onto him. That's exactly what happens in such instances.

This is purely and simply a political assassination of Assange's reputation. He should be seen as a hero for revealing the lies and tricks of the super wealthy.

It amazes me that so many people in the US don't see the truth and in fact vote against their own best interests time after time after time.

At times I think that our society is suicidal.

[struggle4progress]

266. A moment ago, you were telling me "He did NOT lose in the Swedish Courts"

in response to my comment "he has lost in the Swedish courts, in attempts to overturn the outstanding arrest warrant"

So I gave you three links, showing three different losses in Swedish courts in attempts to overturn the outstanding arrest warrant

Now you want to quibble pointlessly "He has not physically been back and forth in the Swedish courts"

Assange lost his quibbles in the Swedish courts regarding the warrant: the Swedish courts find it proper

Assange lost his quibbles in the UK courts regarding the Swedish extradition request: the UK courts find it proper

Res judicata! Those issues have been adjudicated

I have no opinion whatsoever on the question of his innocence or guilt -- but if indeed his innocence will easily be established, then it is entirely unclear why he prefers a multi-year squat in a small embassy room over a short visit to Sweden to resolve matters quickly: the history here suggests either that he suffers from some unfortunate mental condition or that he believes himself guilty as accused

[AikidoSoul]

289. You are right, he did lose his attempts to "overturn the outstanding arrest warrant"

My point was that he has never been charged with a crime, and that makes it very difficult for him to get any kind of closure on the case.

The Swedish prosecutor would love him to turn up in Sweden. But while he was there, immediately after they accused him of certain acts and for days afterwards, the prosecutor repeatedly refused to interrogate him. When he went to England she would not arrange an interrogation there although he offered to meet anyone who would fulfill the normal interrogation duties. The Swedish/USA game is not charge him with a crime, but to keep him in Limbo without and make it impossible for him to regain his life, investigative activities, and family relations.

I focus on him staying in other countries such as Ecuador, because ASSANGE is savvy to the real intentions of the United States, especially with Carl Rove pulling strings to nail him for espionage. For that reason I mentioned that "he was not physically been back and forth in the Swedish courts". It should be obvious by now that if he is extradicted to the US that will be the end of him. He does this because he has no other choice.

Your comment that he "suffers from some unfortunate mental condition" is not really fair IMHO. Who determines that? In Russia they used to put dissidents into mental institutions because they thought that going against authority was sufficient evidence of mental imbalance.

[struggle4progress]

290. Assange left Sweden for the UK after the Swedish authorities repeatedly contacted his lawyer

to arrange for a second interview with him. His lawyer then informed the Swedish authorities that Assange would return to Sweden on a particular date in the near future and that he would be available for a second interview with the authorities then -- but he did not return on that date. Eventually the authorities obtained from the courts an arrest warrant and sought his extradition from the UK: the case progressed through the UK courts for a year and a half, with Assange losing at every level, until Assange decided to forego the next appeal to Strasbourg, jumped bail, and squatted in the Ecuadorian embassy

These are not the behaviors which will suggest obvious innocence to impartial rational minds. But if Assange is as obviously innocent, as he says and as his supporters think, then the natural reaction might be that this matter could have been quickly settled long ago by a short trip to Sweden, with the result that Assange would again be free to roam the world, rather than being confined to a small windowless room in a tiny embassy. And the bare fact, that Assange has preferred that small room to his freedom, plausibly says much about his mental condition. Moreover, given the reputation of the Swedish criminal justice system, one suspects that, even if he were somehow convicted in Sweden, his incarceration there might offer him a considerably more comfortable and stimulating environment than he currently experiences in the embassy. Remarks from various of his lawyers unfortunately indicate that he does not intend to leave the embassy, even Sweden drops all charges

Something is clearly wrong here; and I prefer simple explanations, rather than rationalizations that require international conspiracies

[MoveIt]

327. So we wouldnt torture him if he was extradited to the US?

more like a struggle for believability.

[struggle4progress]

333. To my knowledge, there is not any US indictment against Assange and so no US extradition request

at present

If the UK ever sends Assange to Sweden, and if the US obtains an indictment against him and seeks a forward extradition of him from Sweden, then (under European extradition law) both Sweden and the UK would be required to agree to the forward extradition in order for that to occur, and Assange would be able to fight the forward extradition in both Swedish and UK courts: in particular, under those circumstances, Assange would be free to argue, before the bench in both Sweden and the UK, the concern that you raise

Any credible argument, that extradition to the US would likely result in torture, would prevent both Sweden and the UK from agreeing to a forward extradition from Sweden

Assange was, of course, free to raise such issues during the court sessions in the UK, regarding extradition to Sweden, but chose not to do so, perhaps because one of his own witnesses told the magistrate at Belmarsh that forward extradition was a practical impossibility

And on the known facts, it is difficult to imagine a US charge against Assange that would not be regarded by the Swedish courts as political, since Swedish law prohibits extradition for political activities and since "espionage" (for example) is likely to be regarded internationally as a political activity

[AikidoSoul]

370. Rove says he wants 'Criminal' Julian Assange 'Hunted Down And Grabbed And Put on Trial"

"...hunted down and grabbed"

????

I expect that Assange would end up in Gitmo instead. He says he wants him "grabbed".... does that seem like a legal process to you?


Or does it sound like Extraordinary rendition?

?t=146

[Catherina]

252. Delighted to K&R this. Great post. Thank you n/t

[davidpdx]

269. I admit I'm not very well informed about the whole thing surrounding Assange

nor Manning. I know a bit more about what happened with Snowden then the other two.

So with Assange, putting aside any of the Swedish charges, my question is how is this resolvable?

He is an Australian citizen in the UK hold up in the Ecuadorian Embassy (correct me if I got any of that wrong). What I'm hearing is the concern isn't the Swedish charges, but that he would be extradited to the US. So there are a total of five countries involved in the situation. My second question is whether or not any charges have been filed in the US.

[struggle4progress]

280. Under European law, to extradite Assange to a third country from Sweden, after extradition

from the UK to Sweden, would require the consent of BOTH the UK and Sweden, and so such extradition would be litigable in both the Swedish and the UK courts, as well as in the European court in Strausbourg

Nobody thinks Assange is prosecutable in the US for merely publishing the material Manning provided him, due to US freedom of press law; and Assange clearly cannot be prosecuted under the articles applied in the Manning case. Were certain rather particular facts provable, Assange still might be prosecutable in the US for specific elements related to the Manning releases, but these facts are nowhere in evidence, so far as I can tell, and there's no known US indictment against Assange at present

Were there a US indictment against Assange, it seems unlikely that Sweden would agree extradite him, since Swedish extradition law would not allow extradition for activities not criminal in Sweden or for political offenses. Since Sweden has perhaps the strong transparency traditions and pro-transparency laws on earth, Assange could probably win a extradition-to-the-US case in Swedish court on the argument that his activities involved no cognizable crime in Sweden and that his activities were political in nature

Were there a US indictment against Assange, he would have been much more at risk for extradition from the UK, where the law is much friendlier towards government secrecy

Moreover, extradition from the UK to the US occurs regularly, while extradition from Sweden to the US is much less frequent

[cemaphonic]

284. Really there are only 3 countries involved

Australia is staying out of the affair, and AFAIK, Assange hasn't ever appealed to them for assistance. Any US involvement is 100% conjecture on the part of Assange and his followers. As struggle4progress says in the post above, most of Assange's Wikileaks activities are not illegal under US law - the only avenue for US charges depend on some of the specifics of the Manning leak, and even those would be hard to build a case around.

Furthermore, if the US did request extradition, there are lots of impediments to that being fulfilled. Sweden and the UK would both have to agree to it, and his legal entanglements in those countries would have to be resolved as well. Sweden would be unlikely to agree thanks to our death penalty, and also because they don't extradite for political crimes.

[struggle4progress]

285. Manning could obviously be held to a much stricter standard than Assange. But news coverage,

of what Manning released, provides no reason whatsover to think Manning could have been successfully prosecuted on a federal capital charge. The federal statutes are rather specific about the circumstances under which a federal capital sentence can be sought

Proving a capital case against Assange would also prove a capital case against Manning

So I expect no conceivable US charge against Assange could possibly lead to a capital case

[AikidoSoul]

287. Alleged rape was the cover story. See post number 286 to read about Carl Rove's involvement in this

case.

It seem likely after reading so many opinions and investigations about what the USA is likely planning to do to ASSANGE, it's not hard to conclude that they are going to charge him with espionage.

I really would like you to see post 286 because it's written by a known feminist who has been an advocate for women, and especially those who have been raped.

Naomi Wolf sees right through ASSANGE's accusers. Her well written story and documentation show that the case against ASSANGE is purely political, driven by those 1/10 percenters whose bottom line and poltiical ambitions, are threatened. She writes that Carl Rove is directly involved with the Swedish government to get ASSANGE.

[struggle4progress]

288. Assange's apparent persecutory delusions do not gain credibility simply because various supporters

repeat the claims loudly and often

Wolf's bit about the Assange case was discussed here at DU in some detail when she wrote it three years ago. Many of us will agree that Karl Rove is a foul bucket of slime, that anyone who plays with him acquires a certain stench, and that he visited Sweden (beginning in 2008) to help the conservatives with the then-upcoming 2010 elections there. Rove has the reputation of being a politically-talented bucket of slime, who happens to share the general hatred the US rightwing feels towards Swedish liberalism, and it's reasonable to think Rove went to Sweden with the aim of earning big bucks telling Swedish conservatives how to poke Swedish liberals in the eye with a sharp stick. Assange, on the other hand, visited Sweden in early 2010, intending to explore the possibility of moving the Wikileaks servers there and hoping to become a permanent resident. IMO Rove's political talents do not include forecasting Assange's future travels. The claim, that Karl Rove is somehow involved in the Assange story, is yet more evidence of some mental dysfunction, which attempts to squish every possible fact together into a grandiose paranoid narrative

[davidpdx]

292. So hypothetically if he stepped outside the Ecuadorian Embassy

He'd be arrested and send to Sweden. Since Sweden is the least likely to agree to extradition, wouldn't that make sense (even if he is facing charges there). Then he could seek asylum either in Sweden or Ecuador.

[cemaphonic]

297. Basically yes

If he leaves the embassy, he'll be arrested by the British police, and since he has exhausted all of his extradition appeals, they would send him along to Sweden where he would presumably be charged and stand trial for the remaining rape charge* (the statute of limitations for the other 3 charges he was facing are expiring, which is why he is in the news lately) He will also likely face legal consequences at some point for jumping bail in the UK, but I don't know whether that would be resolved before or after he goes to Sweden.


*One of the favorite arguments of the pro-Assange crowd is that "there are no charges!" which is one of those technical semantic gotchas that leave out a lot of legal context and language barriers. In the Swedish legal system the defendant is formally charged later than in the US system and (important for this case) a pre-arrest interview is conducted as part of the process. Since he has evaded Swedish jurisdiction so far, they have not yet reached the point of charging him, but the European Arrest Warrant (which is one of the key formal mechanisms for his extradition from the UK to Sweden) spells out exactly what he stands accused of. As far as the UK High Court that judged his extradition appeals is concerned, the Swedish equivalent of what would be charges in the UK (and US) legal system exist.

[davidpdx]

299. If he jumped bail would he not forfeit whatever money he put up

It seems like that's pretty much all they could do since he would already be detained. That along with the exhausted appeals would essentially put him on a plane to Sweden and the UK would be out of the picture.

You said it is not likely he would be extradited to the US?

I actually have a friend who is a lawyer in Sweden and I bet I could get him to come over here and explain how the charges work. His English is quite good.

[cemaphonic]

300. The money (paid by friends and supporters mostly)

is already forfeit. We had a few threads about that a year or so ago. Some jurisdictions have additional penalties, not sure about the UK (and even if they do, they may well want to be done with him ASAP)

I don't think he would be likely to be extradited to the US. Wikileaks may have made a bunch of politicians and intelligence agencies mad, but they haven't broken any US laws, and making politicians mad isn't something that even close allies will extradite for. For him to be extradited, the US would have to charge him with something, which they haven't seen fit to do in the last 5 years. Then Sweden and the UK would both have to agree to it, and there would be another long round of appeals and legal wrangling, during which he could put forward a much more credible case for asylum than he currently has.


I would be interested in an informed Swedish legal opinion, but honestly don't bother. These threads are about 95% entrenched camps snarking at each other. It's an interesting case in a lot of ways, and entertaining forum drama, but pretty low signal-to-noise.

[struggle4progress]

304. IIRC violation of the Bail Act can result in a term of imprisonment

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1976/63

[Judgestone]

309. This is extraordinary

I'm the Swede, mentioned in 299.

It's so strange, the whole thing. It's not enough, going into a Swedish police station, accusing somebody of rape, and having him or her arrested. Not if the supposed victim doesn't have any injuries.

What will happen, is probably an interrogation by the police. If the suspect denies and the supposed victim hasn't gone to a doctor to show wounds and can't give the police clothes with rape traces, nothing will happen. You don't lock somebody up just because of verbal accusations and if that anyway should occur, the prosecutioner will set that person free as soon as he or her hears about it. In normal cases.

Every day and several times every weekend, the police all over the country have these stories. There's nothing they can do without evidence. It's just that simple.

Therefore, this whole thing is so strange. It's not normal procedure; far from it.

[AikidoSoul]

312. Thank you and yes, many agree with you who have knowledge of Swedish law

or who have read the transcript / analyses published by the NY Times entitled:

City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court
(Sitting at Belmarsh Magistrates’ Court)
The judicial authority in Sweden
-v-
Julian Paul Assange
Findings of facts and reasons

Found here:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110224-Britain-Ruling-Assange-Extradition-to-Sweden.pdf



Then there is the stunning story citing comments by esteemed investigative reporter Naomi Wolf who analysed the Assange situation. She lists eight things that are seriously wrong with the case against him.

http://markcrispinmiller.com/2011/02/eight-big-problems-with-the-case-against-assange-must-read-by-naomi-wolf/

[davidpdx]

325. He is one of my Facebook friends and was nice enough to drop by at my request

The first link, I tried to read it and got about three pages in and started to doze off.

From what I'm seeing it seems like a EAW has been issued, but it is for questioning not an arrest.

It seems to me like Assange should go to Sweden and give his statement and ask them to determine whether they intend to charge him or not. If not, he should go to Ecuador. The UK would be best off waiving the whole bail thing just to be done with the situation.

[AikidoSoul]

328. EXTRADITION TREATY BETWEEN SWEDEN AND USA EXISTS -- LINK BELOW

TWO DOCUMENTS ARE HERE:

If anyone on DU wants to get a really honest handle on the process used against Assange, I suggest you go to this legal document published by the New York Times entitled

"Swedish Judicial Authority's "Findings of facts and reasons"

. Savvy DUers will see right through the crap loaded on top of Assange.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110224-Britain-Ruling-Assange-Extradition-to-Sweden.pdf

(1) The "Findings of facts and reasons" document is authored by: Howard Riddle Senior District Judge (Chief Magistrate) Appropriate Judge. (PLEASE NOTE, ALTHOUGH SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE RIDDLE SAYS WITHIN THE "FINDINGS OF FACTS AND REASONS" THAT HE IS UNAWARE OF AN EXTRADITION TREATY WITH THE UNITED STATES, ONE HAS IN FACT EXISTED SINCE 1961 --

LINK OF THE EXTRADITION TREATY BETWEEN SWEDEN AND THE UNITED STATES

https://internationalextraditionblog.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/us-sweden-extradition-treaty-14-ust-1845.pdf

[AikidoSoul]

330. He did not "evade" Sweden to avoid an interview. The prosecutor REFUSED to do one.

Your statement cemaphonic:

"...a pre-arrest interview is conducted as part of the process. Since he has evaded Swedish jurisdiction so far, they have not yet reached the point of charging him....."

Assange and his attorneys complained that the Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny, made no effort to interview Assange in either Sweden or Englahd. That would have been the right thing to do if real "justice" were to be done. If Assange had been intereviewed, depending on the content and corroboration by witnesses, the prosecutor could actually CHARGE HIM WITH SOMETHING. To date they have not done so, and it should be apparent to everyone by now that it the prosecutor purposefully played it that way for political reasons.

There is a document that illustrates my point from "The judicial authority in Sweden ". I've cut and pasted an excerpt below. However, I highly recommend that you read the entire thing to give you a better context to this highly unusual case -- especially in the manner that it has been conducted thus far. Context is good to know, and I do believe that the word "context" is actually the first word used by the OP! EXCERPTS ARE FROM PG 2 AND 3

City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court
(Sitting at Belmarsh Magistrates’ Court)
The judicial authority in Sweden
-v-
Julian Paul Assange

pg2 (sorry I can't get the sentences to connect together -- formatting issues confound me)

In cross-examination the witness told me she is not an expert in Mutual Legal Assistance. She confirmed that
she had no direct personal knowledge of what happened in this investigation before Mr Assange left Sweden.
Her evidence is based upon the facts supplied to her by the defence lawyers. In her proof she said Ms Ny had
made no effort to interview him before he left with her permission and knowledge on 27th September. She
confirmed that if the defence lawyer had told the prosecutor that he was unable to contact the defendant for
interview, then the position would be different. “It would be a different case. However it didn’t happen like
that”. When what Ms Ny told the Svea Court of Appeal was put to the expert she said she did not know that.
She agreed that before a Swedish court can issue a domestic warrant it must be satisfied that there is a “probable

pg3

cause” but she can’t imagine how the court reached that view in this case. After some difficulty understanding the questions the witness accepted that the Svea court did not think issuing the warrant was disproportionate. She said that most Swedish lawyers believe the question as to whether something is disproportionate is simply a matter of intuition, which it is not. “It is obvious that they [the court] are wrong”. “I can’t believe they have examined the case on the principle of proportionality”. She then accepted that the Court of Appeal would have heard from Ms Ny and Mr Hurtig, the lawyer for Mr Assange. Again there was some confusion as to the questions and answers and the witness at first appeared to say the defence were not represented but later she said, after being referred to the decision of the court, that this document says Mr Hurtig was present, but she doesn’t think he was. Overall the witness appeared unclear as to whether Mr Hurtig and the Court of Appeal had access to the evidence in the case. She suggested that the prosecution might have been economic with information. She was asked direct questions as to whether the court would decide whether this defendant should be on bail, if returned to Sweden. At first she appeared to avoid the question but did say that this is a matter for the court, with a right to appeal if bail is refused. However she has little confidence in the Swedish system which “has decayed since the mid-1970s. The judges are totally different types now. If I was prosecuted I would not choose a chief judge.” She suggested that judges have less independence now that their salary is decided by the chief judge. She then added that: “almost all Swedish lawyers think we have the best system in the world”, but they are wrong. The decision as to whether the trial would take place in private would be made by the court. However she knows of no case where a rape trial has taken place in public. Article 6 has been incorporated into Swedish law. She agreed that after the case the judge decides whether evidence will be published, but suggested that only the court’s conclusion must be published.

The witness was further cross-examined about the authority to issue the EAW. Again she had difficulty directly answering the question. However she did eventually say that if the decision to prosecute has been made then Ms Ny is entitled to issue the EAW. She then referred to the decision to prosecute, for which the Swedish is “Atalsbeslut”. When pressed as to the decision to issue an arrest warrant and what it involves she said: “I may be wrong”. When further matters about the EAW and the framework decision were put to her she said “I am clueless. I don’t know. I have no firm opinion. [as to the points that must be reached before a prosecutor issues an EAW for the purpose of prosecution].”

She was then asked about her strong criticism of Ms Ny. She doesn’t know her personally but it is the witness’s view that the prosecutor is malicious. That is based on what she has said. She was then referred to the one example that she had exhibited to demonstrate that malice. This is from an article entitled “Securing evidence quickly is important for prosecutors” at page 13 behind tab 9. She was taken through the early paragraphs and accepted that there was nothing really wrong with what was said there. She was then taken to the main passage of which complaint was made, where it says: “Marianne Ny is of the opinion that such proceedings (criminal prosecutions) have a beneficial effect in protecting women, even in cases where perpetrators are prosecuted but not convicted”.

[struggle4progress]

334. Assange's Swedish lawyer rather struck the UK magistrate as a liar:

In cross-examination the Swedish lawyer confirmed that paragraph 13 of his proof of evidence is wrong. The last five lines of paragraph 13 of his proof read: “in the following days <after 15th September> I telephoned [Ms Ny] a number of times to ask whether we could arrange a time for Mr Assange’s interview but was never given an answer, leaving me with the impression that they may close the rape case without even bothering to interview him. On 27th September 2010, Mr Assange left Sweden.” He agreed that this was wrong. Ms Ny did contact him. A specific suggestion was put to him that on 22nd September he sent a text to the prosecutors saying “I have not talked to my client since I talked to you”. He checked his mobile phone and at first said he did not have the message as he does not keep them that far back. He was encouraged to check his inbox, and there was an adjournment for that purpose. He then confirmed that on 22nd September 2010 at 16.46 he has a message from Ms Ny saying: “Hello – it is possible to have an interview Tuesday”. Next there was a message saying: “Thanks for letting me know. We will pursue Tuesday 28th at 1700”. He then accepted that there must have been a text from him. “You can interpret these text messages as saying that we had a phone call, but I can’t say if it was on 21st or 22nd”. He conceded that it is possible that Ms Ny told him on the 21st that she wanted to interview his client. She requested a date as soon as possible. He agrees that the following day, 22nd, she contacted him at least twice.

Then he was then cross-examined about his attempts to contact his client. To have the full flavour it may be necessary to consider the transcript in full. In summary the lawyer was unable to tell me what attempts he made to contact his client, and whether he definitely left a message. It was put that he had a professional duty to tell his client of the risk of detention. He did not appear to accept that the risk was substantial or the need to contact his client was urgent. He said “I don’t think I left a message warning him” (about the possibility of arrest). He referred to receiving a text from Ms Ny at 09.11 on 27th September, the day his client left Sweden. He had earlier said he had seen a baggage ticket that Mr Assange had taken a plane that day, but was unable to help me with the time of the flight.

Mr Hurtig was asked why he told Brita Sundberg-Wietman that Ms Ny had made no effort to interview his client. He denied saying that and said he has never met her. He agrees that he gave information to Mr Alhem. He agrees that where he had said in his statement (paragraph 51) that “I found it astonishing that Ms Ny, having allowed five weeks to elapse before she sought out interview”, then that is wrong. He had forgotten the messages referred to above. They must have slipped his mind. There were then questions about DNA. It was suggested to him that a reason for the interrogation taking place in Sweden was that a DNA sample may be required. He seemed to me to at first agree and then prevaricate. He then accepted that in his submissions to the Swedish court he had said that the absence of DNA is a weakness in the prosecution case. He added “I can’t say if I told Ms Ny that Julian Assange had no intention of coming back to Sweden”. He agrees that at least at first he was giving the impression that Mr Assange was willing to come back. He was asked if Julian Assange went back to Sweden and replied: “Not as far as I am aware”.

In re-examination he confirmed that he did not know Mr Assange was leaving Sweden on 27th September and first learned he was abroad on 29th. He agreed that the mistakes he had made in his proof were embarrassing and that shouldn’t have happened. He also agreed that it is important that what he says is right and important for his client that his evidence is credible.

The witness had to leave to catch a flight. Miss Montgomery said that there were further challenges she could make to his evidence, but thought it unnecessary in the circumstances. That was accepted by the court after no point was taken by Mr Robertson. The witness was clearly uncomfortable and anxious to leave.

City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court (Sitting at Belmarsh Magistrates’ Court)
The judicial authority in Sweden v Julian Paul Assange
Findings of facts and reasons
http://www.aklagare.se/PageFiles/13152/jud-aut-sweden-v-assange-judgment.pdf

[2banon]

275. Excellent Post. Wonderfully succinct and straight forward in articulation

Well Done!

[hifiguy]

302. Thank you. I poked the status quo/corporatist bear

with a very sharp stick. Deliberately. Unintentionally I somehow smoked out a lot of BSers and phonies.

[2banon]

311. Status quo pro-authoritarians tools as well. :).

Well Done!

[pa28]

308. Plenty of posters right here in this thread willing to illustrate your point for you.

"Woefully naive or willfully ignorant".

K&R

[geek tragedy]

329. please excuse yourself from serving on any rape jury nt

[AikidoSoul]

331. Wow! What a comment! You didn't read anything in the swedish legal documents did you?

I thought you were the kind of person who looks before you leap.

But if you read the legal documents posted at the NYT you can apologize to hifiguy. It's not too late:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110224-Britain-Ruling-Assange-Extradition-to-Sweden.pdf

City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court
(Sitting at Belmarsh Magistrates’ Court)
The judicial authority in Sweden
-v-
Julian Paul Assange
Findings of facts and reasons

And then look around this post and find out about how CARL ROVE is helping the Swedish government to smear Julian Assange.

Doesn't that make you even just a little bit suspicious?

Especially since the women didn't sign a document accusing him of rape! Swedish legal authorities can make such allegations even without the "victim's" permission.

A little unsettling....no?

[geek tragedy]

332. the only ones leaping are those who are screaming "liar liar" at the women who

filed sexual assault charges.

Not terribly different from the people who rallied around the Steubenville football team.

[hifiguy]

338. OMG.

[geek tragedy]

340. you have already prejudged the alleged victims to be scheming, evil liars and Assange

to be an innocent martyr.

He's the high school quarterback, and you're the local booster who's worried about him not starting the game against the crosstown rivals.

[hifiguy]

349. That statement is so absurd I will waste only these fourteen words on it.

[geek tragedy]

350. "Not one thing about this case is about any person save Julian Assange"

Very cute how you consciously chose to erase the humanity of the alleged victims from the story.

As human beings, they do not count to you.

So much so that you deny that they are even relevant to their own accusations of rape. it's Julian Assange's world, and those female creatures are just planets orbiting his sun.

Again, this is why you would be really, really awful in a rape trial--you'd be a ringer for the defense on the jury. You don't even acknowledge that the alleged victims exist, let alone that they matter and deserve respect.

Accused rapists are human beings, but you really ought to acknowledge that people who claim to have been sexually assaulted are human beings who matter too. It would be a start anyways.

But, I don't expect that from you. That's not how you roll.

It should really disturb you that it never even occurs to you that the women might not be evil scheming lying Mata Haris.

You just assumed that, without knowing anything about them.

So, again, in conclusion, please avoid serving on any juries where rape and believing a rape victim is an issue, because you're a ringer for any accused rapist in the defendant's chair.

[AikidoSoul]

341. Don't conflate the two incidents - the Steubenville victims were not political targets of Carl Rove

Assange is a world-class activist that has made a lot of very powerful people very mad. So here comes Carl Rove, the Darth Vader of our age, the evil henchman for the 1/10% Super Wealth and Powerful. But before you can accept the possibility that Assage is really a target, you need to admit to yourself that activists are targeted on a regular basis right? You know that the first thing the powers-that-be-do is to discredit the target so that sympathy for the accused is destroyed, right? You know that they also like to make their enemies disappear, -- whether jail, death, or kidnapping, charging them with a crime and making sure it drags on for years....right?

O.K. So enter criminal henchman Carl Rove who was advisor to the Swedish Government in its effort to prosecute Julian Assange for sexual misconduct. The plot thickens as we notice that the two alleged "sexual misconduct" victims both have the same lawyer --- a partner in Borgstrom and Bodstrom. One partner is Thomas Bodstrom, former Swedish Minister of Justice. He helped Rove get approval for a CIA rendition request which enabled the CIA to remove two asylum seekers from Sweden to another middle eastern country where they were tortured.

Do you have any inkling that it's possible since Rove was involved with that dirty attorny, that he might have played a role in making sure the two alleged sexual miscoduct "victims" hired him --- a guy who Rove knows he can count on to be complicit in yet more crimes without getting all wobbly over it?

Remember now..........Rove wants Assange extradicted to the USA, and Sweden DOES have an extradition treaty with the USA.

BTW... it is highly unusual for two plaintiffs to have the same attorney, especially given that the alleged crimes occured in different places and times. The complications that makes for a legal opinion are huge.

Read more of the details here by Mark Crispin Miller at the link below this post.



EXCERPT:

Now that Andrew Kreig, of the Justice Integrity Project, has confirmed Karl Rove’s role as an advisor to the Swedish government in its prosecution of Julian Assange on sexual misconduct charges, it is important that we note the many glaring aberrations in the handling of Assange’s case by the authorities in Sweden.

Dr. Brian Palmer, a social anthropologist at Uppsala University, explained on Kreig’s radio show last month that Karl Rove has been working directly as an advisor to the governing Moderate Party. Kreig also reported, in Connecticut Watchdog, that the Assange accusers’ lawyer is a partner in the law firm Borgström and Bodström, whose other name partner, Thomas Bodström, is a former Swedish Minister of Justice. In that office, Bodström helped approve a 2001 CIA rendition request to Sweden, to allow the CIA to fly two asylum-seekers from Sweden to Egypt, where they were tortured. This background compels us to review the case against Assange with extreme care.

Here he is quoting Naoimi Wolf:

"Based on my 23 years of reporting on global rape law, and my five years of supporting women at rape crisis centers and battered women’s shelters, I can say with certainty that this case is not being treated as a normal rape or sexual assault case. New details from the Swedish police make this quite clear. Their transcript of the complaints against Assange is strikingly unlike the dozens of such transcripts that I have read throughout the years as an advocate for victims of sex crimes."

She goes on to list eight ways in which the legal transcripts are unusual, compared to other legal transcripts.

http://markcrispinmiller.com/2011/02/eight-big-problems-with-the-case-against-assange-must-read-by-naomi-wolf/

[geek tragedy]

342. I'd take the Rove conspiracy angle more seriously if you spelled his name right

Also, Naomi Wolf is a crackpot

[AikidoSoul]

346. Pathetic. Naomi Wolf is a former advisor to Al Gore And Bill Clinton

has written many books, gives speeches at well known universities, was an OCCUPY activist who was arrested.

Incidentally she's very pretty.

You are not a challenging debater on the facts so I will probably not take up much time with you ever again except to do lots of smilies.

Like

[hifiguy]

337. You really, REALLY don't think spy agencies don't try to get the goods

on people they are targeting, including by way of traps like this? Have you read ANYTHING about the history of the CIA, which is ultimately behind this? The focus of the spy agencies on Assange has been nicey documented in this very thread. Espionage agencies don't spend millions of dollars dogging one person unless they consider that person to be a direct danger to the people who call the big-time shots in the world.

Do you think spies hold tea parties and ice cream socials to do their work? They sneak, deceive, SPY, trap, intimidate and co-opt people. That is what spies have done since the time of the pharoahs. It's the reason they exist.

Who Assange is and what he has done by releasing the truth about the masters of war and approvers of torture, made him a target. How anyone can be so spectacularly dense and unable to recognize that governments consider him an incredibly high-value target and dangerous threat to the status quo is, quite frankly, beyond belief and something only a willfully ingorant or hoplessly naive person could believe. Which are you?

[geek tragedy]

339. that's a possibility, which is why there should be this thing called a 'trial'

He could have been set up. He could be a sex criminal.

you are not willing to consider the possibility that he is a sex criminal, and that the women are telling the truth.

because you have blind faith in Assange's nobility and virtue, you can't conceive that he would actually do something like this.

You've already prejudged him to be innocent and them to be liars, and there is nothing that could change your mind.

One of us has an open mind, the other is no different than the Steubenville parents who lashed out at the girl who reported her rape.

As I said, I hope you never serve on a rape jury, because all it would take would be for you to find the defendant sympathetic for you to reach a snap judgment that the alleged victim is a scheming liar.

Rape culture, it exists on the left.

[AikidoSoul]

344. Assange was never given the chance to go to trial, beause he can't do so unless the prosecutor

does a formal interrogation. Assange was refused an interview by the Swedish prosecutor who would not conduct one while he was in Sweden, and again refused when he went to England.

Why are some people so dense about this?!

The prosecutor wanted him accused, not charged.....get it?!!!!! She wanted it to drag on and on and on
andn on and....

Much like you are doing.

This has NOTHING to do with whether I believe or do not belive anything whatsoever one way or the other about whether Assage gets an erection when sleeping naked next to a naked woman who invited him to stay with her at her apartment. He may have nudged him with his erection and tried to get some more sex (they had already had consensual sex earlier in the evening) ----

She even admits to many people that she invited him to stay with her at her apartment and they slept together in the only existing bed.

Did she sign any documents saying he raped her? Do you have any written proof.... or only the claims of a corrupt Swedish legal prosecutor!? grr:

Oh, I feel much better now...

[geek tragedy]

345. Fugitives don't get to complain about a lack of a trial nt

[AikidoSoul]

347. BWAAAAHHHAAA

I finally understand the true, true meaning of the word "dense"!

[cemaphonic]

353. the Assange fanclub "logic" is getting pretty convoluted

Apparently having the statute of limitations run out on the majority of the charges is some sort of diabolical legal ploy on the part of the Swedish prosecutor. If only poor Assange had a forum where he could seek to clear his name and repuation....

(These threads are always such a trainwreck, but I can't seem to look away)

[AikidoSoul]

363. So you don't believe in "diabolical legal ploys"? Good for your peace of mind perhaps, but

very bad if you are going to survive in this world.

I have some toy duckies and other floating toys in my safe that I can send you. There is a training game that goes with them to help you develop an ability to keep your mind focused and to help you develop some essential survival skills and a deep sense of reality.

They're are to be used in deep, dark water, at night, during a storm. In the ocean. I will send you instructions on how you need to get in shape for this daunting task and will assign a trained instructor to insure that you do what you're told. If you don't, you will be put in an isolation chamber so you can think about what you didn't learn.... for a few months.

When you come back -- re-read Assange's predicament and write a complex thesis entitled, "Different Perspective."

The title on the box of rubber duckie toys is called "tough love training" cemaphonic. It's designed for training dweebs to face a wide range of realities.

[cemaphonic]

365. You keep children's bath toys in your safe?

And use them for training?

This thread is a goldmine. Keep it coming.

[AikidoSoul]

366. Yes, I do. We keep all our valuables there!

The "toys" are special training toys for military age pre-training and should not be used by little kids or clueless adults who could easily hurt themsleves or even drown.

It teaches them to face reality in the dark without fear, to deal with it effectively , and to train their eyes see in the dark without the use of special goggles which are problematic when swimming.

The safe is a walk-in lockbox, not a regular safe.

[CanSocDem]

413. Great work on this thread.

Just wanted to mention that and keep this thread kicked. I envy your patience....




.

[AikidoSoul]

419. Thank you CanSocDem. Very much.

and here's another little tidbit, this time from Austrailia's Media Union:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-12-23/journalists-union-shows-support-for-assange/2383428

BIG SNIP

"We're pointing out that we don't believe that Julian Assange has in any way broken the code of ethics, we believe that he's upholding two of its important principles - not to disclose his source, and secondly, to publish in the public interest."

Ms Connor says his situation is extraordinary and he must be supported in the name of free speech.

Australian-born Mr Assange remains in the UK on bail over Swedish sexual assault allegations.

WikiLeaks continues to progressively release 250,000 leaked US diplomatic cables, as promised.

ACTU president Ged Kearney, who will be presenting the award, said Mr Assange and WikiLeaks deserved support.

"WikiLeaks is simply performing the same function as media organisations have for centuries in facilitating the release of information in the public interest," she said in a statement.

"Mr Assange's rights should be respected just the same as other journalists.

"WikiLeaks has broken no Australian law and as an Australian citizen, Julian Assange should be supported by the Australian Government, not prematurely convicted."

[b.durruti]

379. K&R for TRUTH!! ~nt~

[hifiguy]

381. Thanks!

I am very much enjoying that so many are keeping this kicked for visibility.

[Mnemosyne]

417. And it needs another...

[AikidoSoul]

420. And perhaps one more. This one from Assange's attorney in an interview with DER SPIEGEL

Interview conducted by Gregor Peter Schmitz from DER SPIEGEL ONLINE INTERNATIONAL

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/star-lawyer-alan-dershowitz-assange-is-a-new-kind-of-journalist-a-746942.html

Star Lawyer Alan Dershowitz: 'Assange Is a New Kind of Journalist'

BIG SNIP

Dershowitz: Without a doubt. He is a journalist, a new kind of journalist. This is the Pentagon Papers case of the 21st century involving new media and a much more international form of journalism. The Internet knows no national borders. The US encourages the use of new media in countries such as Iran and Egypt, and we must make it clear to the government that it cannot apply double standards to the use of those media when it affects American interests. In any case, we do not believe that the US has jurisdiction over foreign individuals and entities such as Wikileaks that have never before been active in the US.

SPIEGEL: So the key issue in this case would be whether posting the secret information that Assange received is protected under freedom of expression or, as the US government would argue, a threat to national security?

Dershowitz: It can be both. It can be perceived as a threat by the government and yet be free speech. In the Pentagon Papers case, the government asserted in the Supreme Court that the publication of the material was a threat to national security. It turned out it was not a threat to US security. But even if it had been, that doesn't mean that it couldn't be published. We don't have an Official Secrets Act in the United States, as other countries do. Under the First Amendment, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and freedom of association are more important than protecting secrets.

SPIEGEL: The US administration has asked for access to the Twitter accounts of Assange and others. What precedent does this set in the online context?

Dershowitz: It raises very broad issues about a right of association. People associate over the Internet and some people want to associate anonymously, i.e. simply to be a recipient of material. That right of anonymous association has to be protected. There are analogous cases: Back in the 1960s, the state governments tried to get lists of members of the NAACP -- the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People -- at that time a controversial organization. The United States Supreme Court prevented state governments from getting those lists because they would hamper freedom of association and deter people from joining or associating with the NAACP. The same thing is true here. If the government can create lists of all people who have had contact with WikiLeaks, it will deter people from using social media in this way. This then has implications for Iran, for Egypt, and for the world in general. The Tunisian revolution began with Internet leaks and the Egyptian revolution began with anonymous Facebook postings. We want to make sure that this right is fully preserved in the US as well.

[AikidoSoul]

421. Awww...one more! Wikileaks: Brazil President Lula backs Julian Assange

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-11966193

Wikileaks: Brazil President Lula backs Julian Assange - 10 December 2010

President Lula has dismissed leaked cables relating to Brazil as "insignificant"

SNIP

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has criticised the arrest of the Wikileaks founder Julian Assange as "an attack on freedom of expression".

President Lula said the internet publication of secret US cables had "exposed a diplomacy that appeared untouchable".

He also criticised other governments for failing to condemn the arrest.

Mr Assange was detained in the UK on Tuesday over alleged sex offences in Sweden.

"They have arrested him and I don't hear so much as a single protest for freedom of expression", President Lula said at a public event in Brasilia.

SNIP

[Electric Monk]

422. Alan Dershowitz? I suspect his opinion is simply based on whatever is the most anti-Obama

so Assange and wikileaks are merely incidental to that.

[AikidoSoul]

424. He's a conservative who supports WickiLeaks founder Assange

He also supported Obama for president in a NYT Op-Ed piece:

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-Ed-Contributors/The-case-for-President-Obamas-reelection

It's true that Dershowitz is rabid on the Iran deal, and is highly critical of much of what our president does, but he is a Jew and very conservative. It appears that his endorsement of Obama was mainly due to the support our president has shown to Israel.

IMHO it's a good thing that some conservatives at least, see the good aspects of Assange's WickiLeaks.

[AikidoSoul]

423. New WikiLeaks show Saudi Arabia's global attempts to undermine Iran

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/w/wikileaks/index.html

July 2015

Newly released WikiLeaks documents show Saudi Arabia's global attempts in recent years to undermine its main enemy, Shiite Iran; documents portray comprehensive competition with deep roots in religious ideologies that drive two countries; array of oil-funded operation illustrates Saudi's alarm at nuclear program deal reached by world powers with Iran.

continued at NYT here:

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/w/wikileaks/index.html

WikiLeaks Shows a Saudi Obsession With Iran

By BEN HUBBARD and MAYY EL SHEIKHJULY 16, 2015

BEIRUT, Lebanon — For decades, Saudi Arabia has poured billions of its oil dollars into sympathetic Islamic organizations around the world, quietly practicing checkbook diplomacy to advance its agenda.

But a trove of thousands of Saudi documents recently released by WikiLeaks reveals in surprising detail how the government’s goal in recent years was not just to spread its strict version of Sunni Islam — though that was a priority — but also to undermine its primary adversary: Shiite Iran.

The documents from Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Ministry illustrate a near obsession with Iran, with diplomats in Africa, Asia and Europe monitoring Iranian activities in minute detail and top government agencies plotting moves to limit the spread of Shiite Islam.

The scope of this global oil-funded operation helps explain the kingdom’s alarm at the deal reached on Tuesday between world powers and Iran over its nuclear program. Saudi leaders worry that relief from sanctions will give Iran more money to strengthen its militant proxies. But the documents reveal a depth of competition that is far more comprehensive, with deep roots in the religious ideologies that underpin the two nations.

BIG, BIG SNIP -- THIS IS A MAJOR STORY AND LONG