Julian Assange arrested after Ecuador withdraw asylum

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

Dohnjoe wrote: »

To emphasise some key differences

Someone who specifically knows something is happening in e.g. a company, whistle-blows information concerning that activity only, redacts that which might harm innocent parties, releases the information in the most responsible manner possible

Someone else who hates/targets a company for partisan reasons, dumps a whole bunch of sensitive private and personal information, doesn't redact anything, doesn't give a damn about collateral damage, hopes there's something damaging in there somewhere, and dumps it all over the internet

They are differences I agree. I still think lifting half the curtain is better than none. I mean, we already know Trump is a dirt bag. But lifting the tales of the 'brilliant Hillary' is good for the people. Much more realness, see them both for what they are. Scumbags and hacks. Maybe then they can elect someone who is sincere and genuine, and will not bring anymore unnecessary wars to the world.

#No sides

Dohnjoe

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

They are differences I agree. I still think lifting half the curtain is better than none.

Fine, as long as you apply the same standards to yourself, your private information, sensitive work information, your family/colleagues, etc

I'm sure if we drag-netted the lot of it, dumped it all, we'd find some embarassing stuff, possibly some minor indiscretions, maybe even something illegal - and as long as you are some form of public servant, then it could be retroactively validated

I support targeted whistle-blowing to expose direct fraud/sleaze/corruption... not arbitrary dumping of your private info in the hopes of netting some dirt

Hoboo

eagle eye wrote: »

He did the world a favour and is paying the price for it.
He is not a nice person but a brave one.
The rape charges look very suspect.
I sure he would go and face the charges if he wasn't facing extradition to the US.
The whole world knows that he will be extradited to the US if he goes to Sweden.

Facts.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Fine, as long as you apply the same standards to yourself, your private information, sensitive work information, your family/colleagues, etc

I'm sure if we drag-netted the lot of it, dumped it all, we'd find some embarassing stuff, possibly some minor indiscretions, maybe even something illegal - and as long as you are some form of public servant, then it could be retroactively validated

I support targeted whistle-blowing to expose direct fraud/sleaze/corruption... not arbitrary dumping of your private info in the hopes of netting some dirt

Y'know, the only organisations with regard to online information I sincerely have half trust in are the Irish ones. Have zero faith in Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Hawaii, Apple, YouTube ect. but feel the Revenue Commissioners, HSE, Department of Social Protection, Public Sector, Housing Lists, Gardai have enough integrity that they more or less keep Irish citizens information private.

But that's way off topic on Assange.

jochenstacker

If Assange is such a free spirited rebel, why did he only leak dirt on Hillary's campaign and nothing on Trump?
Hillary Clinton is a career politician, whilst Trump is a liar, a collaborator and a clueless hack who got elected on a wave of hate against Hillary, Mexicans, Muslims, dem Libtards, women and those pesky eco nuts.
Thinking he was somehow "less worse" is so idiotic I can't even put it into words, but I'll try.
There are mouldy pieces of dog sh*t that have dried into rock hard pieces somewhere under a bed that have been lying there for several years.
These would have made a better POTUS than Trump. Which is also clear as day, so anyone who voted for him has less brains than said pieces of dog doo doo.
That's sad, but true.
And it still makes him twice as capable than Farage who is a tick on the world's buttocks, but that's just an aside.

Pa ElGrande

jochenstacker wrote: »

If Assange is such a free spirited rebel, why did he only leak dirt on Hillary's campaign and nothing on Trump?

At the time he was stuck in the Ecuadoran embassy hiding from the then Obama administration which included Hillary Clinton as secretary of state before she decided to run for election. There is no difference between different governing administrations when it comes to the military industrial complex.

In addition you overlook that the DNC was compromised by the Clinton campaign and the underlying Democrat party base are split among various caucus groups that don't get along on every issue. There was a significant amount of support in the base for Bernie Sanders who took several states and was possibly cheated out of victory in the California run off.

That becomes significant as regards Assange, is that the person who allegedly leaked something to wikileaks was a DNC worker named Seth Rich, a Bernie supporter. He died after being shot twice in the back.

There is also the matter of abysmal computer security of sensitive information, in addition to Podestas password.


There was also the matter of Hillary personal assistant whose husband was caught for indecent exposure and soliciting minors across state lines whose laptop contents were leaked most likely elements within the NYC police most likely in response to the efforts of the FBI and other elements to bury it.

There was the meeting on the tarmac between Bill Clinton and Obamas inspector general Loretta Lynch, must likely to head off an investigation into the Clinton foundation since James Comey had already shutdown the investigation into the emails.


It looks like everything Assange had got released after his capture from the Ecuadoran embassy, if there was Trump dirt there it would probably have been dumped by now, maybe he has something that he needs to negotiate with I don't know?

jochenstacker wrote: »

Hillary Clinton is a career politician, whilst Trump is a liar, a collaborator and a clueless hack who got elected on a wave of hate against Hillary, Mexicans, Muslims, dem Libtards, women and those pesky eco nuts.
. . . .

Hillary Clinton came to public attention by being married to Mr. Bill Clinton, a previous president of the United States. Had she been elected president she would have been mired in scandal after scandal, as a career politician she was corrupt and was bought and paid for by many of the vested interests that permeate the Washington political scene, ostensibly though the Clinton foundation vehicle used for the purposes of giving bribes the air of propriety.

The idea that is was hate against Clinton does not hold up either, nobody significant had any objection to the principle of woman being president of the United States, it was never even a debate issue. What did come up was the integrity of the two candidates and neither fared well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7-N0EQg7n8

You overlook that Trump is an outsider to the Washington DC political establishment and had to overcome significant opposition from the within the RNC, including one particular RINO and a coup d'état attempt that failed by members of the permanent state.


The fact is Trump was elected as part of a response to a wave of revulsion by significant sections of the population who are being ignored by an out of touch political class whose policies continually undermine them. That wave includes the Brazil, UK, France, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands whose revulsion and labelling them as 'basket of deplorables' immediately alienates them. Trumps election was about sending a "f*** you" message to Washington.

Pa ElGrande

This is an interesting post from an activist named Karen Kwiatkowski on the plight of Mr. Assange.

The criminal pursuit and indictment of Wikileak founder, Julian Assange is the proof in the pudding. The 40 page criminal complaint contains a lot of detail but not much crime. In fact, the “crimes” are more like descriptions of how journalism is done in the information age, if it is true that the job of journalism is to tell the stories, name the names, and state the facts that governments don’t want told, named or stated.


In a normal world, none of this is worth much energy or attention. There is very little legally here to work with, and success so far on the part of the US Government has been solely via a reliable judge in the Eastern District Court of Virginia, and other people’s money and other people’s governments, beholden or paid by the US.


But in the world that exists today, we see these overblown aggressive tactics and we can feel the excitement, the goosebumps and the hot necks of the FBI and CIA suits as they make their bones.


Chelsea Manning is back in prison, ordered back into solitary. She is not the person she was after years of torture, isolation and chemical interrogation. Ironically, her cognitive function as a result of her previous treatment is likely to render any future interrogation useless in court, legally and practically. She received the Jose Padilla treatment, albeit refined by some years of USG practice. Her resultant mental malleability may have produced the ideal Soviet Amerikan Woman.


The US appears to be a nation of laws, and yet, we absolutely are not. One of many lessons and perspectives we gain from the study of Julian Assange is just that. US political influence and debt-funded largesse resulted in Assange’s ejection from the Ecuadorian Embassy into the UK prison for terrorists in Belmarsh. US domestic corruption and misreading of the Constitution produced his indictment.


Furthermore, US government employees, from the DoD, FBI and the CIA have been interviewing Assange in Belmarsh Prison, prior to any extradition decision.


Interviewing is the wrong word. I’d like to say doctoring him, because it would be more accurate, except that word implies some care for a positive outcome. Chemical Gina has her hands in this one, and we are being told that Assange is being “treated” with 3-quinuclidinyl benzilate, known as BZ. What BZ does, from the New Yorker:

“Exposed soldiers exhibited bizarre symptoms: rapid mumbling, or picking obsessively at bedclothes and other objects, real or imaginary. “…The drug’s effect lasted for days. At its peak, volunteers were totally cut off in their own minds, jolting from one fragmented existence to the next. They saw visions: Lilliputian baseball players competing on a tabletop diamond; animals or people or objects that materialized and vanished. ….

Soldiers on BZ could remember only fragments of the experience afterward. As the drug wore off, and the subjects had trouble discerning what was real, many experienced anxiety, aggression, even terror. Ketchum [Dr. James Ketchum, DoD Edgewood Arsenal, MD] built padded cells to prevent injuries, but at times the subjects couldn’t be contained. One escaped, running from imagined murderers. Another, on a drug similar to BZ, saw “bugs, worms, one snake, a monkey and numerous rats,” and thought his skin was covered in blood. “Subject broke a wooden chair and smashed a hole in the wall after tearing down a 4-by-7-ft panel of padding,” his chart noted. Ketchum and three assistants piled on top of the soldier to subdue him. “He was clearly terrified and convinced we were intending to kill him,” his chart said.

One night, Ketchum rushed into a padded room to reassure a young African-American volunteer wrestling with the ebbing effects of BZ. The soldier, agitated, found the air-conditioner gravely threatening. After calming him down, Ketchum sat beside him. Attempting to see if he could hold a conversation, Ketchum asked, “Why do they have taxes, income taxes, things like that?”

The soldier thought for a minute. “You see, that would be difficult for me to answer, because I don’t like rice,” he said.”

BZ is an interesting drug, certainly not the only one used by the US government, but one of them.

Why give it to Assange? What do they want from him? Is it truth they seek, or more information, or is this whole farce something more like obsessive retaliatory rage at feeling powerless, as the world laughed at US State department memorandums and became angry at the idiocy and hate demonstrated by US soldiers 15 years ago. Or maybe something more sinister – that they need Julian Assange psychologically and physically drawn and quartered because he revealed state corruption and weakness? Is it because to the state this is the war, the real war it always fights, a war with the rest of the population for its very survival? Or is Ray McGovern on to the real reason the deep state wants to destroy him?

It is difficult to know if the state is more sociopathic or more psychopathic. What US government employees and/or contractors are currently doing to Julian Assange, and those who may have used Wikileaks as a journalistic avenue, may indicate it is the latter. Torture, isolation, brutality, and the use of psychotropic drugs during interrogations and hiding this from the defendant’s own lawyers by denying them access — this is Lubyanka in the 1950s, not London and DC in 2019.

Allow me to get to the point. The latest word I have received from England is as follows:

“[Julian Assange] is presently under close observation in prison hospital because he has suffered ‘severe transient psychotic episodes.’ My source(s) indicate these episodes occurred after two sessions of coercive interrogation at the hands of UK and US officials. The source(s) stated the HUMINT interrogators used psychotropic drugs in the course of the sessions.”


There are no words. Nothing can be said. 2 plus 2 does equal 5. The FBI is our own special Cheka. The CIA Director’s hands are wet and her organization does not serve American values. Rather than choosing to stay secretive for national security, the modern CIA must stay secretive in order to survive, because it has become functionally illegal. Our president, who puts America first, is putting American values last, even as he tweets his concern for freedom of speech.


source

Dohnjoe

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

It looks like everything Assange had got released after his capture from the Ecuadoran embassy, if there was Trump dirt there it would probably have been dumped by now, maybe he has something that he needs to negotiate with I don't know?

Assange loathed Hillary and used his organisation (Wikileaks) to do everything in it's power to affect the election negatively for her. He's as bad, if not worse, than the politicians and establishment he rails against. And of course he was a Putin sycophant - an administration 100x worse than anything either side of the line in Washington. A consummate hypocrite and a very bitter man.

Pa ElGrande

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Assange loathed Hillary . . . . an administration 100x worse than anything either side of the line in Washington.. . ..

100x worse . . . dunno about that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DXDU48RHLU

Why the hostility to Julian Assange? - he embarrassed the Washington establishment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZE7OfU71Sbk

Dohnjoe

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

Why the hostility to Julian Assange? - he embarrassed the Washington establishment.

He dumped anything he could on the Dems. Dump anything on any party, any company and any individual and you'll find embarrassing stuff

That's crooked political **** - straight from a man professing to be doing it "on principle"

Pa ElGrande

Dohnjoe wrote: »

He dumped anything he could on the Dems. Dump anything on any party, any company and any individual and you'll find embarrassing stuff

That's crooked political **** - straight from a man professing to be doing it "on principle"

And before that he dumped on Sarah Palin during insane McCains 2008 presidential run. Back then he was a darling of the Democrats.


Bush Cancels Speech Because of Assange Appearance.


From liberal beacon to a prop for Trump: what has happened to WikiLeaks?


It's not just Assange, remember Edward Snowden?


Obama: Network Spying Is Serious Human Rights Abuse

The Obama administration sees any leak which it does not itself provides to hype its policies as aiding the enemy. Through its "Insider Threat Program" it pushes this view as an official policy throughout the government:

“Hammer this fact home . . . leaking is tantamount to aiding the enemies of the United States,” says a June 1, 2012, Defense Department strategy for the program that was obtained by McClatchy.

The administration ruthlessly prosecutes anyone who dares to leak even the tiniest issue.


That is why Edward Snowden had to flee the country after he decided to reveal the unlimited spying of the U.S. government against the whole world as well as its own citizen. The Obama administration wants to prosecute Snowden for "espionage" for revealing U.S. spying to the public. Is that irony intended?

Snowden fled to Hongkong where he revealed that the U.S. government not only targets its own citizens but also attacked China's Tsinghua University with extensive hacking, hacked Pacnet, the Asia Pacific fibre-optic network operator, spies on Chinese mobile phone companies and steals Chinese SMS data. The U.S. asked Hongkong to arrest Snowden and to send him back to the States. Meanwhile Snowden, with the help of Wikileaks lawyers, already planed to move elsewhere. The Hongkong government was not amused about the U.S. arrest and extradition request and did not fulfill it. When Snowden stepped on a plane this morning to fly to Moscow it released a statement that rejected the warrant and added:

Meanwhile, the HKSAR Government has formally written to the US Government requesting clarification on earlier reports about the hacking of computer systems in Hong Kong by US government agencies. The HKSAR Government will continue to follow up on the matter so as to protect the legal rights of the people of Hong Kong.

It is not yet known where Snowdens travel will end. The Wikileaks organization's press release states:

Mr Edward Snowden, the American whistleblower who exposed evidence of a global surveillance regime conducted by US and UK intelligence agencies, has left Hong Kong legally. He is bound for a democratic nation via a safe route for the purposes of asylum, and is being escorted by diplomats and legal advisors from WikiLeaks.

Mr Snowden requested that WikiLeaks use its legal expertise and experience to secure his safety. Once Mr Snowden arrives at his final destination his request will be formally processed.

Snowden may stay in Moscow and ask for asylum there. He may fly to Iceland, Venezuela or Equador. Wherever he goes, except for the United States, the people will be on his side. Some U.S. government hacks are now trying to smear Snowden because he is traveling to "autocratic regimes". "That is outrages," said Obama. "Now get the Saudis on the line so we can to talk about Syria."

source

Dohnjoe

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

And before that he dumped on Sarah Palin during insane McCains 2008 presidential run. Back then he was a darling of the Democrats.

That was in 2008. As time went on, the leaks became more and more about Assange's personal vendettas, rather than principled leaks. Which of course is completely unacceptable for any organisation claiming to be impartial. It was supposed to be about uncovering direct illegal activity, corruption, criminal activity, abuse of human rights

and he turned it into a propaganda tool for airing dirty laundry - in line with his personal political views

Pa ElGrande

Dohnjoe wrote: »

and he turned it into a propaganda tool for airing dirty laundry - in line with his personal political views

There are lots of labels thrown at him over the years hypocrite, narcissist and anarchist some of which may be true. He outlined his views many years before wikileaks.

An authoritarian conspiracy that cannot think is powerless to preserve itself against the opponents it induces

When we look at an authoritarian conspiracy as a whole, we see a system of interacting organs, a beast with arteries and veins whose blood may be thickened and slowed until it falls, stupefied; unable to sufficiently comprehend and control the forces in its environment.

Later we will see how new technology and insights into the psychological motivations of conspirators can give us practical methods for preventing or reducing important communication between authoritarian conspirators, foment strong resistance to authoritarian planning and create powerful incentives for more humane forms of governance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxSSpLKxXKo

Billy86

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

That becomes significant as regards Assange, is that the person who allegedly leaked something to wikileaks was a DNC worker named Seth Rich, a Bernie supporter. He died after being shot twice in the back.

Without going into the rest of your post, I just have to point out that is nothing but a far right, fake news lie. Now I'll give you the benefit if the doubt that you were unaware, but his own family even atte pted to sue Fox News over it.

Here is the con man himself getting caught with his pants down trying to spread it (while -also- lying in his claim that wikileaks does not sit on material, as they have done numerous times for their own political agenda):

recedite

Billy86 wrote: »

his own family even atte pted to sue Fox News over it.

Did they win?

recedite

The plan to extradite Assange to Sweden has backfired as the Swedes have been dragging their heels too much. The UK can't keep him in prison for long because he has committed no crime in the UK.
In early June...

A Swedish judge has rejected a request to detain Julian Assange in absentia, complicating hopes to extradite him from the UK.

But as everyone knows, the real plan was just to use Sweden as a staging post to extradite him onwards to the US. It just looks better for the Brits to extradite him on "rape" charges than to extradite him for journalism crimes.


By mid June they had decided to cut out the middle man, and to hell with the bad publicity.

A request by the US to extradite Julian Assange has been signed by the Home Secretary Sajid Javid ahead of a court hearing on Friday.
By certifying the request, Mr Javid has effectively rubber-stamped it so it can now be considered by the court.
Assange will appear via video before Westminster magistrates on Friday.
The US wants the Wikileaks founder to face charges there related to the leaking of government secrets.

I reckon he will be locked away in a US jail very soon now.
Its a terrible way to treat one of the very few genuine asylum seekers in Europe.

eagle eye

You won't see the EU step in either, bunch of chicken ****s when it really matters.

Sweden should just be told “you caused this mess by issuing a European arrest warrant, you ****ing sort it out “

Ship the guy off to Sweden and let them deal with him.

Hotblack Desiato

eagle eye wrote: »

You won't see the EU step in either, bunch of chicken ****s when it really matters.

So you think the EU has the power to interfere in criminal justice matters in member states?

If they did have that power, you'd be screaming blue bloody murder :rolleyes:

seamus

recedite wrote: »

By mid June they had decided to cut out the middle man, and to hell with the bad publicity.

Someone needs to start investigating Javid and see what dirty money he's got in his pockets.

There's too much of this crap from him of just signing orders without legal advice or judicial oversight, leads one to conclude that he's doing someone else's bidding.

The plan here is clearly to get Assange on US soil whether it's legal or not. Once the Americans have him, they're not going to send him back under any circumstances.

I'm no fan of Assange's, but the US will strip him of any legal rights.

nacho libre

So for some posters it seems his real crime is that he did not reveal Russian crimes. Would these posters be as bothered about making distinctions between unethical partisan leaks and good investigative journalism if he had merely exposed Russian crimes.
Also it's clear they are not objective in this matter, for if they were they would not use the playground tactics of defending the behaviour of one side, by pointing out the actions of others. If you go through the CIA's own declassified history there are a litany of crimes committed over the years from illegal invasions, coups, to supporting death squads, America and Russia are as bad as each other in their foreign policy.

What assange did was brave, but he should not be immune from justice if he did rape those women, just as those knights in shining armour, should not be immune from prosecution for machine gunning innocent people to death from their helicopter, but some posters are not as concerned about the latter criminal acts it seems

The Enbalmer

nacho libre wrote:

What assange did was brave, but he should not be immune from justice if he did rape those women, just as those knights in shining armour, should not be immune from prosecution for machine gunning innocent people to death from their helicopter, but some posters are not as concerned about the latter criminal acts it seems

These things happen in war.

nacho libre

The Enbalmer wrote: »

These things happen in war.

So some crimes don't matter, they can be casually dismissed, if they happen in war and, crucially, are carried out by the side you identify with?
Assange, if he is is guilty, and the pilots of that helicopter, should be both held to account for their crimes.

Manic Moran

recedite wrote: »

The plan to extradite Assange to Sweden has backfired as the Swedes have been dragging their heels too much. The UK can't keep him in prison for long because he has committed no crime in the UK.

From the link.

"But the judge rejected the motion, as Assange is already detained in the UK"

It seems to be a technicality which makes sense. Why detain someone "in absentia" when he is already detained?

I guess one may depend on your definition of "Long". He was imprisoned for 50 weeks in May for the crime of skipping bail. (Legally, "failing to surrender to the court"). 7 weeks have passed, means up to 43 more to go. Plenty of time for the Swedes or Americans or anyone else to get their ducks in a row.

Hotblack Desiato

nacho libre wrote: »

America and Russia are as bad as each other in their foreign policy.

Probably.
But ask anyone who grew up under communism whether they'd rather live in an American sphere of influence, or a Russian one...

What assange did was brave

Skipping bail and hiding out in an embassy is utter cowardice, it is the complete opposite of bravery.

Russian journalists speaking out against the Putin kleptocracy, now that's actual bravery

but he should not be immune from justice if he did rape those women

But he ran away from justice and you call him brave for it. That does not compute.

pure.conya

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Probably.
But ask anyone who grew up under communism whether they'd rather live in an American sphere of influence, or a Russian one...



Skipping bail and hiding out in an embassy is utter cowardice, it is the complete opposite of bravery.

Russian journalists speaking out against the Putin kleptocracy, now that's actual bravery



But he ran away from justice and you call him brave for it. That does not compute.

brave keyboard warrior here /\/\/\

Hotblack Desiato

pure.conya wrote: »

brave keyboard warrior here /\/\/\

What's your problem with my post?

eagle eye

Hotblack Desiato wrote:

What's your problem with my post?

He wasn't running away from the rape case. I don't think you are that stupid. He was trying to avoid being extradited to the US.
If you have read anything about this you will know that one of the women wanted Assange to take a test, this ended up with a complaint of rape. The other woman was kicked out of Cuba because of her links to the CIA.
You do know that the charge he is facing is one of removing a condom during sex with the girl with CIA links? You do know that she produced the condom which was tested and was found to have no dna on it and had never been used? The woman's name is Anna Ardin.
The second woman wanted Assange to take a test. She had no intention of making a complaint of rape but ended up making one and it's believed to be on the advice of Ardin.

1641

eagle eye wrote: »

He wasn't running away from the rape case. I don't think you are that stupid. He was trying to avoid being extradited to the US.
.

"The New Statesman’s legal correspondent, David Allen Green, expended quite a lot of energy back in 2012 swatting down every unfounded assertion and conspiracy theory for why Assange could not stand before his accusers in Scandinavia without being instantly rendered to Guantanamo Bay. Ironically, as Green noted, going to Stockholm would make it harder for Assange to be sent on to Washington because “any extradition from Sweden … would require the consent of both Sweden and the United Kingdom” instead of just the latter country. Nevertheless, Assange ran and hid and self-pityingly professed himself a “political prisoner.”

eagle eye

The above sounds like something written by a CIA sympathiser.