Current Julian Assange arrested. * Priti Patel approves US extradition 17/6/2022

[sprockets]

Still defending 7 years of criminal governments conspiring against a whistle-blower for exposing their war-crimes.

It's our governments that need to have their feet held to the fire here & be accountable, not Assange.

The fact that inversion of justice is lost on you here is astounding.

Assange has single-handedly exposed the entire Western government criminal nexus by his actions....He has brought them all out into the transparent open for us all to see....We owe him a huge debt of gratitude for sacrificing his life in the pursuit of truth & justice....And you still just don't get it.

In other words you don't have proof. You're now on ignore.

 

[Registered User]

Sentenced to 50 weeks jail in England for skipping bail

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e7939c47c19b

 

[Procrastinator35]

Sentenced to 50 weeks in prison in England for skipping bail

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e7939c47c19b

What a ginormous political mis-carriage of justice.....He's just done 7 years in the Ecuadorian embassy ffs....Christ the British establishment are some sick puppies.

 

[Kurve]

What a ginormous political mis-carriage of justice.....He's just done 7 years in the Ecuadorian embassy ***....Christ the British establishment are some sick puppies.

Agree I was expecting a wholly suspended sentence but .. public opinion is turning more sensibly to his favour and he might actually be safer in there atm.

 

[sprockets]

"For the last weeks since he was arrested he has spent 23 out of 24 hours a day in his cell most of the time."

https://www.news.com.au/world/break...s/news-story/1137ff77e799fd16c8ee320e41bebdd0

Most of the time... Talk about fake news. So he's virtually in solitary according to Wikileaks, who seem to be milking the publicity for all it's worth. Is that because he's been sentenced to it or because he chooses to spend 23 hours a day there? Is it for his protection? If I was in prison I wouldn't want to be out and about with the other crims, I'd rather stay in my cell.

And this prison that was built in 1991 has appalling conditions? I'd reserve the 'appalling' bit for genuinely appalling conditions, like in some third world countries.

 

[sprockets]

"A Swedish court is set to hear on June 3 a prosecutor's request that WikliLeaks founder Julian Assange be detained in absentia on suspicion of rape, the first step in his possible extradition to Sweden. ..."

https://www.news.com.au/world/break...e/news-story/25a16a05e49beb23b914a9b47dbd6e00

 

[Procrastinator35]

Assange has already been cleared of those charges by a U.N Court.....But we'll just ignore all that with our criminally motivated political interference in due process.

This entire saga is one drawn-out, long-winded political farce; & every right thinking person knows it.

 

[Kurve]

Loaded with 18 more charges.

The US Justice Department has charged WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange with receiving and publishing classified information, including the names of confidential sources for American armed forces.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05...w-charges-from-us-justice-department/11144990

 

[sprockets]

This bit is interesting and possibly at the heart of the problem.

"Assange in an August 2010 interview called it "regrettable" sources disclosed by WikiLeaks could be harmed, but said WikiLeaks was "not obligated to protect other people's sources," according to the indictment."

https://www.news.com.au/world/break...s/news-story/9e0a327a249111345507735b3788b07c

The problem is he's supposedly an ally of the US given he's an Aussie (was he living in the US at the time?). He may not have a legal obligation (he may) but surely he has a moral one. It's kind of like saying "That girl across the road was being beaten but I had no obligation to help her because she's someone else's child".

If you believe in the Aussie/US way of life you have an obligation to abide by its rules. If you don't believe then you're the enemy.

 

[Procrastinator35]

This bit is interesting and possibly at the heart of the problem.
"Assange in an August 2010 interview called it "regrettable" sources disclosed by WikiLeaks could be harmed, but said WikiLeaks was "not obligated to protect other people's sources," according to the indictment."
https://www.news.com.au/world/break...s/news-story/9e0a327a249111345507735b3788b07c
The problem is he's supposedly an ally of the US given he's an Aussie (was he living in the US at the time?). He may not have a legal obligation (he may) but surely he has a moral one. It's kind of like saying "That girl across the road was being beaten but I had no obligation to help her because she's someone else's child".
If you believe in the Aussie/US way of life you have an obligation to abide by its rules. If you don't believe then you're the enemy.

Oh Yes....Just like Hilary Clinton & the entire DNC establishment should be currently serving jail time for election fraud, you mean?

Lets be honest here....Rule of law doesn't count nor matter when it comes to the Western criminal establishment nexus...Only when it comes to the common man is it applied to the letter....And doubly so when it comes to those who expose that crime.

 

[Kurve]

The US has ordered a probe into Alexander Downer's role in the 'Russia hoax'. That might make our government a little nervous and possibly more proactive in doing what they can for Julian Assange.

 

[Procrastinator35]

The US has ordered a probe into Alexander Downer's role in the 'Russia hoax'. That might make our government a little nervous and possibly more proactive in doing what they can for Julian Assange.

Tis all farcical twaddle….ScoMo is a Murdoche lackey...He won't be lifting a finger to aid or assist one of his own citizens.

 

[Kurve]

Tis all farcical twaddle….ScoMo is a Murdoche lackey...He won't be lifting a finger to aid or assist one of his own citizens.

He might have to.

 

[Kurve]

This bit is interesting and possibly at the heart of the problem.

"Assange in an August 2010 interview called it "regrettable" sources disclosed by WikiLeaks could be harmed, but said WikiLeaks was "not obligated to protect other people's sources," according to the indictment."

https://www.news.com.au/world/break...s/news-story/9e0a327a249111345507735b3788b07c

The problem is he's supposedly an ally of the US given he's an Aussie (was he living in the US at the time?). He may not have a legal obligation (he may) but surely he has a moral one. It's kind of like saying "That girl across the road was being beaten but I had no obligation to help her because she's someone else's child".

If you believe in the Aussie/US way of life you have an obligation to abide by its rules. If you don't believe then you're the enemy.

Journalists expose their own governments all the time though Sprockets.

Partisan journalists are using the excuse that Assange exposed Afghanis who assisted US forces. Like he'd done something horribly wrong in doing so and this is why he isn't a journalist because they have morals.

 

[Procrastinator35]

He might have to.

I'll believe it when I see it....At least he has Sir Geoffrey Robertson QC on his side & a certain John Pilger....Not to mention facts, The U.N, the U.S constitution, Democracy, freedom of the press & free speech too....So yeah, there's that.

All the U.S govt has is a desperate need to silence whistle-blowers from blowing their cover as war criminal scum, at odds with their own constitution, The U.N charter & Human Rights everywhere.

The Anglo-U.S establishment are getting super desperate all round.....BREXIT, Assange, Iran, China, Russia, The U.N....It's all falling apart right before them.....I'm loving it.

 

[sprockets]

Journalists expose their own governments all the time though Sprockets.

Partisan journalists are using the excuse that Assange exposed Afghanis who assisted US forces. Like he'd done something horribly wrong in doing so and this is why he isn't a journalist because they have morals.

Can you point out to me instances of where (allied) publications have published stolen and classified information that exposes the US and/or its allies to reprisal? If you can, can you also point out the instances of where they weren't hauled over the coals/through the courts for it?

It's one thing to say a country committed war crimes - we all know that happens - but it's an entirely different thing to put (allied) people in danger.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Can you point out to me instances of where (allied) publications have published stolen and classified information that exposes the US and/or its allies to reprisal? If you can, can you also point out the instances of where they weren't hauled over the coals/through the courts for it?

It's one thing to say a country committed war crimes - we all know that happens - but it's an entirely different thing to put (allied) people in danger.

'Classified' does not trump freedom of the press or the principles & tenets of transparency in a Democracy…..Killing innocent journos from a helicopter gun-ship on a whim only becomes 'classified' when it's a war-crime that one desperately wants to cover-up....Hence the word 'Classified'....The C.I.A & the criminal establishment Intel network, operate outside of the normative range of acceptable human behaviours.....That in no way grants them the right to transcend those human values, rights & laws we must all accept & follow in a humane civilised society.

 

[Kurve]

Can you point out to me instances of where (allied) publications have published stolen and classified information that exposes the US and/or its allies to reprisal? If you can, can you also point out the instances of where they weren't hauled over the coals/through the courts for it?

It's one thing to say a country committed war crimes - we all know that happens - but it's an entirely different thing to put (allied) people in danger.

Far as I'm aware sprockets he isn't being prosecuted for exposing allied spies to danger. And the US should have hauled them straight out of Afghanistan the moment they were.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Sweden have moved in on him again, at the behest of the U.S, as they know full-well that testimony elicited under torture/duress (Manning) simply won't count nor cut it, in a court of Law.

 

[sprockets]

Far as I'm aware sprockets he isn't being prosecuted for exposing allied spies to danger. And the US should have hauled them straight out of Afghanistan the moment they were.

But his actions put them (allies) in danger and that's what makes it a crime. The solution isn't for the US to haul them out after they've been put in danger, the real solution is for someone to not put them in that danger in the first place.

Does anyone really believe he's being charged for telling us what we already know or even assume happens?

 

[Kurve]

But his actions put them (allies) in danger and that's what makes it a crime. The solution isn't for the US to haul them out after they've been put in danger, the real solution is for someone to not put them in that danger in the first place.

How about not spying on your own people in the first place?

 

[Procrastinator35]

Excellent vid here extrapolating on the notions of 'journo', as opposed to citizen & First Amendment rights.....As anyone here with good instincts will know in advance, it's all mere equivocation on the part of the U.S criminal justice department.

 

[BlueE]

Here are some interesting articles.

https://www.veteranstoday.com/2019/...schilds-groomed-assange-as-a-bankster-hitman/

Although Wikileaks may now be separated from Julian Assange, this claims Wikileaks was used in 2011 as a Rothschild operation to discredit their Swiss banking rival, after JA was groomed from 2008 when Wikileaks was awarded The Economist’s New Media Award.

The Rothschilds began grooming Julian Assange in 2008, when Wikileaks was awarded The Economist’s New Media Award. The Economist is the voice of Britain’s establishment (led by the British Rothschilds) which has, for example, on balance, supported Britain’s involvement in the Iraq war. Sir Evelyn Robert Adrian de Rothschild was chairman of The Economist from 1972 to 1989. His wife Lynn Forester de Rothschild currently sits on The Economist’s board. The Rothschild family also has a large shareholder interest in The Economist.

At first blush, it is incredulous that the The Economist, the pinnacle of the establishment, would give their award to Assange knowing full well that he was releasing classified government documents and being overly aware of the havoc this will create in the world. The Rothschilds’ oft- stated goal (over the centuries) is for a One World Government (i.e. The New World Order). To this end they engineer conflict between nations, to create crises that will then be utilized to increase the power of international entities – the UN, World Bank, IMF, etc. For example, they (and other closely-related families like the Schiffs) financed the Bolsheviks. In the past, the Rothschild empire have profited by bankrolling both sides of war.

US senator Joe Lieberman is the Rothschild’s point man in America. During the last presidential election, he took his friend, Republican candidate John McCain to Jacob Rothschild’s house for a fund-raiser for McCain. Lieberman is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (a Rothschild cabal which is essentially the shadow government of the US). Lieberman’s recent actions resulted in cutting off the money supply of Wikileaks: Paypal, Mastercard, Visa, stopped accepting donations for Wikileaks. Lieberman publicly took credit for censoring Wikileaks’ website by pressuring Amazon to stop hosting the website. The result was that Anonymous hactivists launched attacks on the websites of companies (above) which had discontinued service to Wikileaks. Lieberman’s campaign against Wikileaks had the effect of increasing the martyrdom and hence the popularity of Assange and Wikileaks. Lieberman made Assange a star, nearly becoming Time magazine’s Man of The Year.

Julian Assange’s lawyer is Mark Stephens of Finers Stephens Innocent, a major London elite law firm. They are the legal adviser to the Rothschild’s prestigious Waddesdon Trust.

Assange’s main media partner is The Guardian. The Guardian has been infiltrated by Rothschilds. The Guardian is controlled by Guardian Media Group whose chairman is Paul Myners a past employee of N. M. Rothschild Limited & Sons Limited. Guardian Media Group is owned by Scott Trust which became a limited private company in 2008 with all trustees becoming directors of the Scott Trust. Anthony Salz was appointed as a trustee of Scott Trust in 2009: He is currently executive vice-chairman of the investment Bank Rothschild.

The Guardian gave the US cables to the current New York Times. The chairman of the NYT is Arthur Sulzberger Jr., a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. He is the son of Arthur Ochs Sulzberger and grandson of Arthur Hays Sulzberger who served as a Trustee for the Rockefeller Foundation (in cahoots with Rothschilds for One World Government).

After a time in a real prison, Assange was “imprisoned” in a countryside mansion at the home of Vaughan Smith, the owner of Frontline Trust, a news organization that seeks to influence TV journalists. Frontline is funded by George Soros’ organization, Open Society Institute, and George Soros is intimately intertwined with the Rothschilds. George Soros has been a frequent business partner with James Goldsmith (father of Jemima Khan and cousin of the Rothschilds). The director of Soros’ Open Society Institute, Richard Katz was director of N M Rothschild & Sons for 16 years. Other board members like Nils Taube also hold positions in Rothschild banks, etcetera. On October 25 and July 27 this year, Assange was a speaker at Vaughan Smith’s Frontline Trust.

 

[BlueE]

In the light of Ecuador allowing British police to enter their territory and arrest Assange this looks very suspicious.

https://www.imf.org/en/News/Article...-imf-executive-board-approves-eff-for-ecuador

IMF Executive Board Approves US$4.2 Billion Extended Fund Facility for Ecuador
March 11, 2019

The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) today approved a US$ 4.2 billion (435 percent of quota and SDR 3.035 billion) arrangement under the IMF’s Extended Fund Facility (EFF) for Ecuador. The Board’s decision enables the immediate disbursement of US$652 million (equivalent to SDR 469,7 million, or 67.3 percent of Ecuador’s quota). This arrangement provides support for the Ecuadorean government’s economic policies over the next three years.

 

[petedavo]

1 of the 2 protestors that locked themselves into the UK Embassy in Melbourne posts a selfie of herself being taken out of the building.



Earlier



Sent from my HTC 2PQ910 using Tapatalk