Illegitimate Transfer of Inalienable European Rights via Convention(s) & Supranational Bodies Establishment of Sovereignty-Usurping Supranational Body Dictatorships Enduring Program of DEMOGRAPHICS WAR on Europeans Enduring Program of PSYCHOLOGICAL WAR on Europeans Enduring Program of European Displacement, Dismemberment, Dispossession, & Dissolution
No wars or conditions abroad (& no domestic or global economic pretexts) justify government policy facilitating the invasion of ancestral European homelands, the rape of European women, the destruction of European societies, & the genocide of Europeans.
U.S. RULING OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR TO SALVAGE HEGEMONY [LINK | Article]
Who's preaching world democracy, democracy, democracy? —Who wants to make free people free?
The moral force of WikiLeaks is the bent for the truth and that truth is in the interest of the common good. According to both Plato and Aristotle the common good can only be delivered and sustained as a result of truth. Not since Socrates challenged Athenians has anyone driven as passionately for the truth as has Julian Assange. The WikiLeaks founder drove an unprecedented contemporaneous calling to challenge the citadels of the powerful that forever degenerate to oppressor and oppressed dichotomies. WikiLeaks gave not only voice to the powerless but also to the sense of hope. In taking on the powerful, WikiLeaks took on the rulers of the world and the influence and control they have over institutions throughout our world.
The majority would say that no-one can defeat corruption, that corruption is an immutable constant, that exploitation is an immutable constant. Many would say there are millions of injustices each day under the sun on this earth, so why bother my brother? But there are some who think contrary, that the pursuit of truth should be met fearlessly. That truth does matter. WikiLeaks took on the rulers of the world – they who in effect control the fate of the world.
[ ... CONTINUES ... ]
The presumptions of innocence and of whistleblowing in the public interest were hijacked by the then Prime Minister’s statement that WikiLeaks had acted ‘illegally’. Gillard and her government portrayed WikiLeaks as if a criminally bent organisation. The American administration was depicting WikiLeaks as a terrorist organisation. What led a highly skilled lawyer such as Gillard to abrogate the presumption of innocence, to dismiss the right of WikiLeaks as whistleblowers, as investigative journalists, as acting in the public interest? Prime Minister Gillard fell into line with the contrived rage from the American government and its clandestine institutions – a nation of which a majority of its conservatives and excessive self interest groups were calling for the smashing of WikiLeaks and for Assange’s blood. Psychosocially this was displaced anger – it was about guilt and being exposed. Censorship protects the guilty. This type of anger and the subsequent malice and vindictiveness have been a tragic constant in the human narrative; where moral forces shine the light on the immoral or amoral and are then punished for doing so.
President Barack Obama’s administration has prosecuted and jailed more whistleblowers than any previous American administration.
The David and Goliath like tussle between the oppressed and the oppressor continues.
Haiti is one of the world’s poorest nations. It is the poorest nation in the western hemisphere. More than 80 per cent of Haiti’s predominately rural population lives in poverty. During the past decade the poverty has degraded further, becoming more extreme and dire. The life expectancy of a Haitian is 57 years of age. Less than half the Haitian population is literate and only one child in five attends secondary schooling. Less than 25 per cent of the population have access to safe water. The Haitian population continues to grow at about 200,000 per year.
In November 2010, WikiLeaks released 1,918 documents from 2003 to 2010 – ending six weeks after the January 12, 2010 earthquake which further devastated Haitian life. The documents were among the most disturbing I have read of the files published by WikiLeaks, in how America was controlling Haitian policy-making but to the detriment of the Haitian people.
It is not news that America meddles, bullies, wars with nations who do not abide. But it is darkly disturbing to read these documents and to see one of the world’s powerless nations downtrodden further by the world’s most powerful superpower. The Haitian cables wreak an air of hopelessness. One cannot not be moved by the Haiti cables.
TONY JONES: Okay. You're watching Q&A. Remember you can send web or video questions to our website. The address is on the screen to find out how to do that. Well, the next question is a video question and it comes from Julian Assange, who is under house arrest in England.
JULIAN ASSANGE: Prime Minister, you just got back from Washington but what Australian citizens want to know is which country do you represent? Do you represent Australians and will you fight for Australian interests because it's not the first time that you or a member of your cabinet has been into a US government building and exchanged information. In fact, we have intelligence that your government has been exchanging information with foreign powers about Australian citizens working for Wikileaks. So Prime Minister, my question to you is this: when will you come clean about precisely what information you have supplied the foreign powers about Australian citizens working or affiliated with Wikileaks and if you cannot give a full and frank answer to that question, should perhaps the Australian people consider charging you with treason?
TONY JONES: Take the treason part first, if you like.
[ ... CONTINUED ... ]
TONY JONES: What about espionage which, of course, is the charge the United States would like to lay at the feet of Julian Assange?
JULIA GILLARD: Well, Mr Assange hasn't been charged with anything relating to Wikileaks. He's got some legal issues relating to personal conduct questions - alleged personal conduct questions in Sweden - and no one in the United States raised with me Mr Assange. No one.
-- formal accusation of felony
-- issued by grand jury
-- based on proposed charge, witness testimony & other
-- presented by public prosecutor (District Attorney)
-- grand jury vote that there is enough 'evidence'
-- of 'probability' that a 'crime' was committed
-- & that accused should be tried
-- District Attorneys do not present full case
Grand Juries
-- used in federal charges
-- due to Fifth Amendment to US Constitution
-- capital crime (or otherwise infamous crime) presentation to Grand Jury required
-- states use 'preliminary hearing' in place of grand jury
Sealed Indictment
-- indictment (formal accusation)
-- sealed so it stays non-public until unsealed
Federal court ruling re sealed indictments example:
"The magistrate judge to whom an indictment is returned may direct that the indictment be kept secret until the defendant is in custody or has been released pending trial. The clerk must then seal the indictment, and no person may disclose the indictment’s existence except as necessary to issue or execute a warrant or summons."
Anyone else wonder why the then Prime Minister of Australia was not informed by her American counterparts (and strategic, defence and trade allies), that an American Grand Jury had issued a sealed indictment for the head of Australian journalist-publisher, Julian Assange, about 6 weeks prior to the Prime Minister's appearance on national Australian television?
Likewise, in the case of Australian Foreign Minister Rudd (aka deposed-by-Gillard former Labor Prime Minister) ... over a year down the track.
Yes, I realise it is a 'sealed' indictment, but if US private intelligence contractor, Stratfor, knew about the issue of a sealed indictment against Assange in January of 2011 (as per their leaked communications), the US government knew also, of course.
UNITED STATES prosecutors have drawn up secret charges against the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, according to a confidential email obtained from the private US intelligence company Stratfor.
In an internal email to Stratfor analysts on January 26 last year, the vice-president of intelligence, Fred Burton, responded to a media report concerning US investigations targeting WikiLeaks with the comment: ''We have a sealed indictment on Assange.''
He underlined the sensitivity of the information - apparently obtained from a US government source - with warnings to ''Pls [please] protect'' and ''Not for pub[lication]''.
Mr Burton is well known as an expert on security and counterterrorism with close ties to the US intelligence and law enforcement agencies. He is the former deputy chief of the counter-terrorism division of the US State Department's diplomatic security service.
Stratfor, whose headquarters are in Austin, Texas, provides intelligence and analysis to corporate and government subscribers.
On Monday, WikiLeaksbegan releasing more than 5 million Stratfor emails which it said showed ''how a private intelligence agency works, and how they target individuals for their corporate and government clients''.
The Herald has secured access to the emails through an investigative partnership with WikiLeaks.
The news that US prosecutors drew up a secret indictment against Mr Assange more than 12 months ago comes as the Australian awaits a British Supreme Court decision on his appeal against extradition to Sweden to be questioned in relation to sexual assault allegations.
Mr Assange, who has not been charged with any offence in Sweden, fears extradition to Stockholm will open the way for his extradition to the US on possible espionage or conspiracy charges in retaliation for WikiLeaks's publication of thousands of leaked US classified military and diplomatic reports.
[ ... ]
The Australian embassy in Washington reported in December 2010 that the Justice Department was pursuing an ''active and vigorous inquiry into whether Julian Assange can be charged under US law, most likely the 1917 Espionage Act''.
In recent answers to written parliamentary questions from the Greens senator Scott Ludlam, the former foreign affairs minister Kevin Rudd indicated Australia had sought confirmation that a secret grand jury inquiry directed against Mr Assange was under way.
Mr Ruddsaid ''no formal advice'' had been received from US authorities but acknowledged the existence of a ''temporary surrender'' mechanism that could allow Mr Assange to be extradited from Sweden to the US. He added that Swedish officials had said Mr Assange's case would be afforded ''due process''.
The US government has repeatedly declined to confirm or deny any reported details of the WikiLeaks inquiry, beyond the fact that an investigation is being pursued.
The Stratfor emails show that the WikiLeaks publication of hundreds of thousands of US diplomatic cables triggered intense discussion within the ''global intelligence'' company.
In the emails, an Australian Stratfor ''senior watch officer'', Chris Farnham, advocated revoking Mr Assange's Australian citizenship, adding: ''I don't care about the other leaks but the ones he has made that potentially damage Australian interests upset me. If I thought I could switch this dickhead off without getting done I don't think I'd have too much of a problem.''
But Mr Farnham also referred to a conversation with a close family friend who he said knew one of the Swedish women who had made allegations of sexual assaultagainst Mr Assange, and added: ''There is absolutely nothing behind it other than prosecutors that are looking to make a name for themselves.''
While some Stratfor analysts decried what they saw as Mr Assange's ''clear anti-Americanism'', others welcomed the leaks and debated WikiLeaks's longer-term impact on secret diplomacy and intelligence.
Stratfor's director of analysis, Reva Bhalla, observed: ''WikiLeaks itself may struggle to survive but the idea that's put out there, that anyone with the bandwidth and servers to support such a system can act as a prime outlet of leaks. [People] are obsessed with this kind of stuff. The idea behind it won't die.''
Stratfor says it will not comment on the emails obtained by WikiLeaks. The US embassy has also declined to comment.
"Together with 25 other media partners from around the world, we have been investigating the activities of this company for some months, and what we have discovered is a company that is a private intelligence Enron. On the surface, it presents as if it's a media organisation, providing a private subscription intelligence newsletter, but underneath it is running paid informants networks, laundering those payments through the Bahamas, and through Switzerland, through private credit cards. It is monitoring Bhopal activists for Dow Chemicals. It is monitoring PETA activists for Coca Cola.
So, it is engaged in a seedy business, and not ready to be content with merely monitoring activist for big corporations or providing private intelligence to the US military. It has now started its own internal strategic private investment fund, where it is using this information from insiders -- paid information from insiders -- in order to invest in what it calls a wide variety of geopolitical financial instruments, such as stocks, bonds, and currencies, and this makes News of the World look like kindergarten. I think it is an important exposure for us. It is part of a long continuation that we have had in exposing the activities of secret organisations. Late last year, we worked on the spy files release, showing some 176 organisations involved in providing surveillance agreements and, in some cases, bulk surveillance agreements to monitor whole countries, and so this is a private intelligence organisation.
The activities of intelligence organisations increasingly are privatised and, once privatised, they're taken out of the realm of the Freedom of Information Act, of US military law, and so they are are often used by governments who want to conceal a particular activity. But Statfor is simply out of control. I mean, even as a private intelligence organisation, it has been completely hopeless in protecting the identity of its informants, or even providing accurate information. It has engaged in internal deals with its captive financial investment firms that it is setting up. So it really is some type of Enron, where there is not even proper corporate control within the organisation."
-- end audio --
Daily Mail UK
'Shadow CIA' buys state secrets for cash via Swiss bank accounts, claims WikiLeaks as it releases 'stolen' files
By Daily Mail Reporter Updated: 07:43 EST, 28 February 2012
Whistleblowing website WikiLeaks today started to publish more than five million confidential emails from the global intelligence company Stratfor. The emails, dated from July 2004 to late December 2011, are said to reveal the 'inner workings' of US-based firm known as the 'Shadow CIA'. [ ... ]
WikiLeaks accused Stratfor of 'routine use of secret cash bribes to get information from insiders', and claims an email from chief executive George Friedman in August 2011 suggested his concern over its legality.
In it, he wrote: 'We are retaining a law firm to create a policy for Stratfor on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. 'I don't plan to do the perp walk and I don't want anyone here doing it either.' The group said: 'Like WikiLeaks' diplomatic cables, much of the significance of the emails will be revealed over the coming weeks, as our coalition and the public search through them and discover connections.' It said Stratfor did secret deals with dozens of media organisations and journalists - from Reuters to the Kiev Post.
'While it is acceptable for journalists to swap information or be paid by other media organisations, because Stratfor is a private intelligence organisation that services governments and private clients these relationships are corrupt or corrupting.' The group said it has also obtained Stratfor's list of informants and, in many cases, records of its pay-offs.
"Assange, who has not been charged with any offence in Sweden, fears extradition to Stockholm will open the way for his extradition to the US on possible espionage or conspiracy charges in retaliation for WikiLeaks's publication of thousands of leaked US classified military and diplomatic reports."
Australian Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd - 2012 " ... acknowledged the existence of a ''temporary surrender'' mechanism that could allow Mr Assange to be extradited from Sweden to the US."
EU-NATO IMPERIALISM ❌ 