Sweden Prosecutor's Delay Blamed for Destroying Three Lives

GOOGLE TRANSLATION * CAUTION * * INEXACT * STERN http://www.stern.de/panorama/wikileaks-gruender-julian-assange-kaempft-gegen-schweden-2180034.html Julian Assange to Sweden destroyed three lives, a culprit GOOGLE TRANSLATION * CAUTION * * INEXACT* March 14, 2015, 11:35 clock Wikileaks founder Julian Assange had to wait for years for no reason on an interrogation. A scandal that destroyed three existences, but only one culprit knows: the Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny. A commentary by Sylvia Margaret Steinitz The Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny and Wikileaks founder Julian Assange © Adam Ihse / AFP / Facundo Arrizabalaga / EPA The whole thing would have been so not necessary. The international arrest warrant. Applications to court. The asylum at the Embassy of Ecuador, the existential twilight seventy square meters. One thousand days without sunlight and fresh air. Sentry outside the windows, which devoured already rumored 15 million pounds of British taxpayers' money. The whole theater - in vain. Years ago, it now turns out, the Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny would have to arrange that Julian Assange interviewed in the UK to allegations of sexual offenses from 2010 and whether charges are brought. She always had declared a survey in the message is not possible, Assange had come to Sweden. The unspoken "or": In case of refusal, he would just go stale in the message. The warrant remained upright and in any case so that the whole farce about the Wikileaks founder, who fears being extradited to the US, he should enter the Swedish soil. Fairness And now that Assange's legal team called the Supreme Court, an Attorney General has taken responsibility and also the limitation period for some of Assange threatens to spread alleged actions, as it suddenly goes but Marianne Ny has submitted a request to question Assange in London to take a sample of DNA. What she needs is unclear, the Swedish authorities have already from the year 2010. But, after all. It is an examination that is desired by all parties, especially by Julian Assange. The course is not Uschuldslamm. Do the statements of the two affected women in the matter only half the truth, this man has a huge problem with people in general, and respect for women in particular.  [Uschuldslamm, means 'innocent lamb' (I think).  The bit about the 'huge problem with people" and 'respect for women in particular', is arguable, of course.] Assange is smart, arrogant, irrational, utterly fearless. On a ten-point scale from hero to asshole he is a clear five. But heroes and assholes have to prove the same right to due process, the possibility of her innocence, if convicted on appropriate punishment and the chance of rehabilitation. Assange may already sitting longer than a prison sentence would make if convicted.  [LOL, I don't know how the author came up with an Assange is 5 on an 'assh*le' scale assessment, if that's a proper translation.] But while the situation in which Julian Assange is located, has been sufficiently discussed, one thing remains largely unnoticed by the public: what does this long waiting time for the two women. Help protect the mighty lawyer Since XXX & XXX released in August 2010 on a Stockholm police station to seek advice on how to Julian Assange could be forced to have an HIV test is over her life basically. XXX stated that Assange had had intercourse with her while she was half asleep, and that without prevention protection, even though she had repeatedly emphasized to want to have sex only with condom. XXX had come along to support XXX and explain his sexual encounter with Assange, who she'd felt as violent. The police saw among other things, satisfies the conditions of the rape and put an ad on. Rape in Sweden is a public offense that needs no own display by the victim. 24 hours later dropped the competent prosecutor this fall again. XXX  brought forward Protect your help with a ideologically related Advocate Claes Borgström, well-connected politically powerful, ambitious. By a legal trick he left the lodge a complaint again and took a very different prosecutor from the nearly 500 kilometers from Gothenburg on board: his old friend Marianne Ny, which should delay the process until 2015. Video Swedish authorities want to question Assange in London The end of a career For more than four years, XXX and XXX maligned as intelligence officials, who Assange had set a trap, abandoned their personal experiences with Assange ridicule - not least by Geoffrey Robertson, Assange's acclaimed lawyer and head of Amal Clooney stated that the portrayal of XXX describe "what is commonly known as a missionary position". XXX and XXX full names were mentioned in violation of the protection of their identity in articles published their photos in the network appeared ace address and a picture of her house on input. She eventually fled to Palestine to participate, on a project. XXX popped up quite as. It has created a new lawyer who is primarily concerned with photos and other items that affect XXX personal lives to sue from the network. For the aspiring artist video of farewell from the Internet also meant the end of a career that had just begun. The political career of XXX, who worked for a subset of the Swedish Social Democrats will never take the path that might have been possible without this floating method. Assange spurred the witch hunt Assange did nothing against the witch-hunt against XXX and XXX, on the contrary, in a subtle way he spurred the agitation also still on. He has switched Only since 2014, and stressed that the two women had not introduced the display. Much too late. Marianne Ny that could be provoked by Assange attacks in their direction into a power struggle, it is understandable though unprofessional. But with their blockade, they also took the women affected the ability to finally finish the thing. How much suffering victims of sexual violence through lengthy proceedings, is sufficiently well known. Marianne Ny is considered to be declared feminist and expert on Sexual Violence and yet consciously accepts the gain of a possible post-traumatic stress disorder in buying, apparently to punish an unpleasant counterparty. To leave two women in an unnecessary and intolerable, endanger its existence condition is inexcusable. But senior public prosecutor Ny is accountable to no one, seated at her job, Swedish workers law goodness. And so she plays for four years God. If a person is responsible for the mess in which not only Julian Assange, but XXX and XXX stuck, it's Marianne Ny. COMMENT The article is a poor Google translation of German, so all you can get from it is a few snippets and an overall feel for the article.  Some of it, I'm not entirely clear on.  And some translates hilariously:  as in the 5 points on the assh*le-scale.  Sorry, people, but I find that really funny.  Not so funny is the bit where Assange is deemed to have issues with 'people' and with 'respect for women in particular'.  Not quite sure how the author has come to that conclusion, unless she knows him personally.  And even if he was known personally, such a statement would be a statement of subjective opinion, rather than a statement of objective fact. Moving on:  I thought the criticism of Ny was interesting.  Ny in a job 'accountable to no one', plays God for four years.  Ny a declared feminist and expert on sexual violence who has, nonetheless, let this matter stagnate, risking possible post-traumatic stress disorder  ("PTSD"). However, that risk of PTSD is, of course, on presumption that the state of Sweden's allegations of wrongdoing reflect an actual trespass upon the two women (which the women themselves have previously and separately denied). Alternatively, even if the women in question were caught up in political intrigue, Sweden dragging this highly political and public matter out over the space of nearly 5 years is enough to give anyone PTSD, including Assange, I should think. The writer indicates that one of the women has fled to Palestine on a project and the other woman  cut short an otherwise promising career (if I understand this translation correctly). That woman's career appears to have been on the periphery of the Swedish Social Democratic party. Swedish Social Democratic party seems to connect a number of people associated with this intriguing Swedish predicament:  including the lawyer who resurrected the dismissed matter — 500km away in Gothenburg:  Claes Borgström. The author of the Stern article refers to, lawyer, Claes Borgström, as "well-connected politically powerful, ambitious." It appears from the article that prosecutor, Marianne Ny, is the prosecutor Claes Borgström found (500km away) to resurrect the dismissed matter — and this obliging prosecutor is referred to, in this Google translation, as Claes Borgström's 'old friend'.  Found this pretty exciting news (assuming the translation is correct).  Wow, how mind-blowing is all of this?  It's probably one of the first mainstream articles I've seen that sort of connects the dots (or it gets rather close).  On the other hand, this could be old news to everyone else and nothing to get excited about.  But I still think it's rather cool to see Sweden come under criticism in mainstream media. The author made a good point about Sweden dragging this out and the potential effects of doing so, particularly when the person taking the hit for the delay is a 'radical feminist' (who presumably ought to have more concern as to the impact of delay on the two women involved). This is a most interesting and pertinent criticism of the prosecutor's delay. And perhaps the criticism is even more interesting in light of the probability that the delay did not really come down to a single person in Sweden holding up progressing the matter by refusing to question Assange.  The disregard for the women's welfare — by a feminist state and feminist prosecutor — is perhaps more disturbing when the delay is considered alongside the strategy of a governmental, legal and political apparatus that's held Assange in place on behalf of the US Department of Justice, for more than 4 years.  Regardless of who in Sweden is responsible for not progressing this matter in a timely manner, the point about the delay by Sweden still stands and deserves examination, in the aftermath of Sweden's improbable about-face. As for the Claes Borgström and Marianne Ny 'old friend' factor referred to in Stern, how awkward.  LOL * Checked the distance between Gothenburg & Stockholm.  Varied figures.  470km was one of those figures, which is near enough to the author's 500km.

ASSANGE - 1,000 DAYS AT ECUADOR EMBASSY

It's 1,000 days today.  BBC reports that supporters are expected to hold a vigil outside the Ecuador embassy.

US GOVT INJUSTICE, BARRETT BROWN & THE EVIL EMPIRE

BARRETT BROWN Journalist BARRETT BROWN #FreeBarrett  TWITTER: https://twitter.com/FreeBarrett_   SITE: http://echelon2.org   SUPPORT: http://freebarrettbrown.org My Post Cyberpunk Indentured Servitude http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/31/my-post-cyberpunk-indentured-servitude.html Journalist Barrett Brown looks back in anger at the government’s trumped up charges against him as he starts a 63 month prison sentence. Not long ago I was a mild-mannered freelance journalist, activist, and satirist, contributing to outlets like the Guardian and Vanity Fair. But last Thursday I was sentenced to 63 months in federal prison in a case that Reporters Without Borders cited as a key factor in its reduction of America’s press freedom rankings from 33 to 46. As inconvenient as this is for me, the upside is that for the first time in the two and a half years since I was arrested, I am at last able to speak freely about what has been happening to me and why—and what it means for the press and the republic as a whole. A portion of my sentence stems from an attempt I made to conceal from the government the identities of certain contacts of mine: pro-democracy activists living under Middle Eastern dictatorships such as Bahrain, with which the U.S. is known to share intelligence on such things. Another large chunk is due to an admittedly ill-conceived public threat I made—in the midst of opiate withdrawal and what court psychologists say was a manic state brought on by medication issues—to investigate and humiliate an F.B.I. agent, who had himself threatened to indict my mother in an attempt to get me to cooperate against individuals associated with the Anonymous movement (my mother was indeed charged). Though I clearly stated that my intent was not violent, the prosecution claimed that my “victim,” Dallas-based Special Agent Robert Smith, had reason to fear that I might physically harm him and even his children—in which case it is not immediately obvious why the prosecution felt the need to alter the end of the sentence in question when quoting it on the indictment. (My complete statement, (PDF) in which I make a point of noting that I was merely going to proceed along lines spelled out by the FBI-linked contractor C.E.O. Aaron Barr while he was investigating activists on behalf of his corporate clients, and that I was doing so perfunctorily, and merely in order to make a point about the F.B.I.’s traditional reluctance to investigate its allies, has been viewed on YouTube by well over 100,000 people, including the dozens of reporters who have covered the story; none of them seem to agree with the Department of Justice contention that a journalist’s threat to “look into” someone in an explicitly non-violent manner necessarily entails violence.) A separate declaration I made to the effect that I’d defend my family from any illegal armed raids by the government, while silly and bombastic, was not actually illegal under the threats statutes. To judge from similar comments made by Senator Joni Ernst, it would not even have necessarily precluded me from delivering the G.O.P.’s recent response to the State of the Union address. But the charges that prompted the most international outrage were those alleging fraud. In late 2011, I copied and pasted a link to a publicly-available file, which chat transcripts introduced in court showed that I initially believed to contain the same leaked corporate emails I’d long been in the habit of reviewing for my Guardian articles. The file turned out to contain customer data, including credit card numbers. Although the government’s own forensics showed that I never opened the file, the D.O.J. contended (PDF) that I had thereby engaged in 11 counts of aggravated identity theft, punishable by a mandatory minimum sentence of 22 years in federal prison. The feds were eventually forced to drop these precedent-setting charges, after which I agreed to plea to the spurious make-believe crimes described above, so as to avoid the perils of a Texas jury. (As the government itself warned in a 2013 public filing, (PDF) my status as an atheist would have seriously damaged my ability to get a fair trial here in Dallas—although one might wonder how a jury would know I’m an atheist unless the government made a point of bringing it up, as they did, say, in that 2013 public filing.)     I will spend the rest of my life in a strange state of post-cyberpunk indentured servitude to an amoral private intelligence firm. I also had to plea to an Accessory After the Fact charge for having contacted the corporate espionage outfit Stratfor after some Anonymous-affiliated hackers stole several million of the firm’s emails and vowed to publish them online; I offered to arrange with the hackers to redact any of those communications that could potentially have endangered any foreign contacts if made public. For this, I will not only serve additional prison time, but have also been ordered to pay the company over $800,000—which is to say that I will spend the rest of my life in a strange state of post-cyberpunk indentured servitude to an amoral private intelligence firm that’s perhaps best known for having spied on Bhopal activists on behalf of Dow Chemical. That the prosecution did not quite manage to articulate how I did any damage to this particular company did not seem to dissuade U.S. District Judge Sam A. Lindsay in this matter. Likewise, His Honor did not express any visible interest in the fact that the F.B.I. itself has acknowledged having actually overseen the hack on Stratfor via its confidential informant, Hector “Sabu” Monsegur, who recently appeared in a national television interview with Charlie Rose to discuss his role in these matters. Quite understandably, most media coverage of last week’s sentencing hearing has focused on the exciting twist ending. Despite having dropped the notorious “linking” charges, the government still managed to convince Judge Lindsay to hold me responsible for the act of copying and pasting a link—a link that was already public, and which led to a file which was already itself public, and to which other journalists had also linked without being prosecuted for it—by way of a sentencing mechanism known as “relevant conduct.” In doing so, Judge Lindsay stated that this would not actually cause any concern among journalists—an exquisitely bizarre claim insomuch as countless journalists have been expressing concern over this very matter since the charges were first brought in 2012, with Wired’s Quinn Norton even having testified at a prior hearing that she herself would have been subject to such prosecution not only in the Stratfor affair, but throughout much of her career reporting on online security. In the wake of last week’s sentencing, Norton announced she could no longer report on security breaches and advised her colleagues to refrain as well. I will leave it to Judge Lindsay to explain to the concerned members of the press that they are not actually concerned; based on the commentary that’s now coming out of outlets ranging from the U.S. News & World Report to The Intercept and the Columbia Journalism Review, His Honor has a big job ahead of him. Instead, I will merely point out the other major scandal inherent to this case, one which has so far gone largely unreported—that in addition to having lost the “right to link” journalists have also now lost the “right to quote.” In trying to make the case that I was a violent threat to Agent Smith, the prosecution attributed to me the following statement: “Dead men can’t leak stuff … illegally shoot the son of a bitch.” I will admit that this is clearly an outright call for murder, and thus would certainly seem to warrant an F.B.I. investigation. The problem is that it wasn’t I who uttered this, but rather Fox News commentator Bob Beckel, who said it on national television in the course of a no-doubt productive discussion about Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. I had merely quoted the statement on my Twitter feed—in disapproval, of course, as I happen to admire Assange, and he, himself, has put out a statement expressing astonishment that the U.S. government would attribute to me a call for his murder made by someone else on a major cable news network. Now, it would be one thing if this had simply been a misunderstanding on the part of the D.O.J., which, in all fairness, was clearly in a rush to flesh out its fabricated case against me. But when my attorneys pointed this out in a motion to dismiss the charge, the prosecutor, Candina Heath, actually stuck to her guns, arguing that, by quoting this, I had “promoted” the idea. Among many other things, this leaves open the question of why Bob Beckel has not been indicted. The answer is that, unlike me, Beckel did not spend much of 2011 investigating the full extent of the Team Themis conspiracy, in which F.B.I.-linked contracting firms prepared a covert and criminal scheme by which to launch cyber-attacks in a campaign of intimidation against activists and journalists deemed supportive of Wikileaks—a conspiracy that, as the press and even some members of Congress noted at the time that it was foiled and made public by Anonymous, had been put in motion by none other than the D.O.J. itself. The dozen or so Americans who still have faith in the essential decency of the D.O.J., despite the assorted scandals of the last 15 years, might find it hard to believe that the charges against me were actually prompted by my efforts to bring attention to the agency’s own wrong-doing. It’s a fine thing, then, that the late journalist Michael Hastings saw fit to publish a copy of the original search warrants in my case, which list Themis firms HBGary Federal and Endgame Systems as subjects to be searched among my files, along with echelon2.org, the website on which my colleagues and I posted our research on the matter. Stratfor, the firm I allegedly cost almost a million dollars via a single phone call, is left unmentioned. But what should worry Americans most is not that the various frightening aspects of this case can fill a rather wordy article. What should worry them is that this is not even that article. The great bulk of the government’s demonstrable lies, contradictions, and instances of perjury are still sealed and thus unavailable to the public. Other matters are just now coming to light, such as the revelation, two days before my sentencing, that the D.O.J. had withheld from my defense team sealed chat transcripts from the Jeremy Hammond hacking case which contradicted its key claim that I was a co-conspirator in the Stratfor hack. And there are still other aspects of all this, such as the F.B.I.’s seizure of my copy of the Declaration of Independence as evidence of my criminal activity, that I blush to even commit to print, lest I not be believed, even despite the F.B.I. itself having now confirmed it. Suffice to say that I shall produce a far more comprehensive account of this whole affair later this year, even if I have few illusions that it will make much difference; a state that had reason to fear the press would not have acted as openly as it has, for as long as it has, and to such ends as it has. If anyone needs me in the meantime, I’ll be in prison.  [ ... LOL, BB's always funny.] http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/31/my-post-cyberpunk-indentured-servitude.html COMMENT How's that for sleaze, injustice, and violation of democracy, liberties, law, and who knows what else?  And that's not some official USG enemy; that's the Evil Empire itself. People don't get a fair go or fair trials in America. Notice how they only go after those they consider a 'threat' and how arbitrary it all is? Also, that you can't get a fair hearing as an atheist in Texas is surely a joke. So is the prosecution targeting a person's lack of superstitious beliefs, to gain the upper hand in a courtroom, based on a trumped up case to further the interests of a bunch of wrongdoers and sleasebags. If that isn't evidence of absolute godlessness and a case for atheism, I don't know what his.  Another good reason for society to abolish state endorsement of religion (which is used to manipulate ignorant or misguided people politically, and in other ways, by the state, by lobby funders, by interest groups, by individuals, by preachers, by gurus and so on - the list is endless).   Look-Ups Cluster of contractors known as Team Themis Team Themis - a consortium made up of: HBGary Palantir Berico (with Endgame Systems serving as a "silent partner") source:   http://echelon2.org/wiki/Team_Themis Barrett Brown Faces 105 Years in Jail http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/barrett-brown-faces-105-years-in-jail-20130905 ROLLING STONE - EXTRACTS (some minor modification) ... origins of Team Themis date to Bank of America  alarm over Julian Assange 2010 claim to possess documents that "could take down a bank or two." Department of Justice recommended Bank of America retain the services of: DC law firm Hunton & Williams Booz Allen Hamilton (high-powered intelligence contractor) On behalf of Bank of America, Hunton & Williams turned to the large and growing world of InfoSec subcontractors to come up with a plan, settling on: > HBGary > x2 data ­intelligence shops: Berico Technologies Palantir Technologies Themis three were also preparing a proposal for Hunton & Williams on behalf of another client, the US Chamber of Commerce. The leaked HBGary documents revealed that Themis was exploring ways of discrediting and disrupting the activities of organized labor and its allies for the Chamber. potential money at stake in these contracts was considerable According to Wired, the trio proposed that the Chamber create a $2-million­a-month sort of cyber special-forces team "of the kind developed and utilized by the Joint Special Operations Command." They also suggested targeting a range of left-of-center organizations, incl.: > SEIU > watchdog groups like US Chamber Watch > Center for American Progress (The Chamber of Commerce and Bank of America have denied ever hiring Team Themis or having any knowledge of the proposals.) Pursuing Chamber and Bank of America contracts, the Themis three devised multipronged campaigns, amounting to: > a private-sector information-age COINTELPRO  (ie FBI's program to infiltrate and undermine "subversive" groups between 1956 and 1971) Among the Themis ideas presented to Hunton & Williams: 1.      Feed the fuel between the feuding groups. 2.      Disinformation. 3.      Create messages around actions to sabotage or discredit the opposing organization. 4.      Submit fake documents and then call out the error. 5.      The revelations represented a triumph for Brown and his wiki. A group of Democratic congressmen asked four Republican committee chairs to hold hearings on the "deeply troubling" question of whether "tactics developed for use against terrorists may have been unleashed illegally against American citizens." But the calls for investigation went nowhere.  Brown on lack of outrage Washington & media: "[politicians and pundits] clearly intent on killing off even this belated scrutiny into the invisible empire that so thoroughly scrutinizes us – at our own expense and to unknown ends."  SOURCE:  http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/barrett-brown-faces-105-years-in-jail-20130905

Telesurtv Interview - Assange - The Lastest

Telesurtv Interview FULL ARTICLE @ SOURCE http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/An-Obvious-and-Conspicuous-Injustice-says-Assange-on-Asylum-20150314-0002.html An 'Obvious and Conspicuous' Injustice, says Assange on Asylum Published 14 March 2015 (15 hours 31 minutes ago) In an exclusive interview with teleSUR, Julian Assange talks ... [ ... EDIT ... ] CS: On the topic of your asylum, tell me about the larger context of the U.S. investigation into WikiLeaks?    JA: Well I had already had a number of run-ins and legal cases with big banks and the U.S. government before. Our publications beginning 2010 set off a major conflict with the U.S. government. As a result, the U.S. started up what it calls a whole government investigation, involving more than a dozen different U.S. agencies that is believed to be the largest ever investigation into a publisher. As the investigation has gone by, the competition between the different agencies over who is leading it has clarified. Now leading it is the Department of Justice National Security Division, the Department of Justice Criminal Division and the FBI as the sort of boots on the ground. [DoJ Nat Sec + Crim Div & FBI] A lot of information has come out over time about the U.S. formally admitting court filings in February, just over a week ago, that is a multi-subject, ongoing, long-term, investigation and other findings saying that WikiLeaks is the central target of that investigation, not Chelsea Manning, who has already been dealt with. This is not an investigation that is simply confined to the United States. The different agencies involved include the National Security Agency, the CIA, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). The CIA and DIA, that is publicly admitted. The NSA, that is in the Snowden documents and also other records that came out from the Pentagon. According to Snowden records I was placed on an NSA manhunt list in 2010. But we know that the U.S. military intelligence was spying on me from 2009 onwards in Germany. The FBI has conducted its activities in Europe, in Iceland and Denmark; the U.S. military intelligence in Germany; and the FBI also in the UK; and U.S. and-or Swedish intelligence in Sweden. As time has gone by we have gone from a position of defense in these cases to offense. Which I have been able to do really to the thanks of the asylum of the embassy, since it is a static situation now [inside the Ecuadorean embassy] we can plan a bit more. We have filed criminal cases now against the U.S. intelligence activities in Germany where U.S. military intelligence came off their bases in Wiesbaden and went down to Berlin to spy on me and one of my friends, Jeremy Zimmerman, who runs a freedom of the press outfit in Paris. The criminal case in Denmark last year, in relation to the unlawful FBI actions against us in Europe. The FBI sent a secret private jet over to Iceland where they had recruited an informant for the U.S. embassy in Iceland. The Icelandic government found out about it, that they did it without authority, and told [the U.S.] to get out. They [the U.S.], then smuggled the informant around a number of different hotels around Iceland interrogating him. Eventually they were kicked out of the country by the interior minister. They then took that informant, who was being paid, to Washington DC, and interrogated him for another five days and engaged in various plans to try and get that informant to steal hard drives from England, and engaged in cash transfers and other interrogations with him — he did at least two — so that is the subject of another criminal complaint in Demark in relation to the FBI in Denmark, and the illicit cash payments that occurred to that informant. So that is most aspects of the criminal case in the United States. Something important came out early this year in relation to Google. The U.S. government subpoenas all information that Google had — email, search terms, etc. — from three of our journalists: Sarah Harrison, Kristinn Hrafnsson and Joseph Farrell. These subpoenas were important. Not only did they place Google under gag orders, but the subpoenas revealed a sort of legal attack that the U.S. government is making on media and on WikiLeaks. So their defense is that they are investigating — which add up to 45 years in prison — espionage, conspiracy to commit espionage, computer hacking, general conspiracy, theft of U.S. government information. [*An attack on ALL media, not just WikiLeaks.] These charges are very interesting because they are sort of like crossing the spectrum of different charge types. They are trying many, many different ways to attack the organization and me using conspiracy on the one hand but also non-espionage charges that make it easier to extradite people, and you can see a little bit like that, that just happened in a case in Canada where they extradited someone for a non-conspiracy related charge successfully even though he claimed asylum in relation to his espionage investigation.  [Matt de Hart  [Link 1] & [Link 2]] The two conspiracy charges are detail. But lets put this back into the global context about what is going on. WikiLeaks does not publish in the United States. WikiLeaks is not registered in the United States. WikiLeaks is a publisher in a variety of jurisdictions: Iceland, France, at one time Sweden. So how is it that the United States is claiming jurisdiction to prosecute us for these offenses. What the U.S. is claiming is that any information about the United States gives it jurisdiction and if we publish information that came from the U.S. government, therefore it has jurisdiction to prosecute publishers that exist outside the United States, because of their connection. Now, the way journalists and publishers work is that some journalists get something from a source and then communicate it to other journalists in the organization; the editors and subeditors, the publisher, the distributor, the tech guys, and so on. What the U.S. government is saying is that this flow of information, that occurred within WikiLeaks as a media organization, is a conspiracy. So they have worked out a way to embroil an entire media organization in the U.S. jurisdiction based on any information coming in through one journalist working for that media organization. So it is a territorial grab by the United States to say that they can go after any media organization anywhere in the world that publishes information that they say is classified; not even classified actually… That they say has been derived from someone in the United States — a government worker doing something that they should not have — that is enough. If they allege one crime in the United States, some government worker that cannot handle classified information properly, or something else, and that circulates to others in a media organization that use that to go after the whole media organization. So it is really quite a serious threat to global media scrutiny of U.S. wars and U.S. spying. CS: So in this larger context, what does the Swedish investigation represent?    JA: The U.S. investigation was already on foot. Without wanting to go into the details of the Swedish investigation, which are well documented on justice4assange.com, the Swedes started their investigation and then dropped it, and then started it again, and then in the context of us just about to publish Cabelgate, put out an Interpol red notice for this preliminary investigation with no charges and kept it going ever since. The women in the case say to the courts that they did not want any such investigation. But the government took this up anyway. So it is quite a strange case and is being used as a PR stick and it has trapped me here in the UK. So whenever we talk about what is going on in the U.S. case and how serious that is, the PR attack says “oh no, no, no. That is about some Swedish sex case.” That has been a tremendous distraction. Formally the Swedes say that it is a quote “preliminary investigation” un-quote. I have not been charged and there has been nothing done in that preliminary investigation for four years and the Swedish authorities admit it. Now it seems likely that the preliminary investigation will dissipate within the next year. But the UK has said that even if that happens they are going to arrest me anyway and you also have the U.S. case. CS: Is there anything you want to say or add about your 1000 days of asylum generally?    JA: It has been a difficult 1000 days. Not so much for me but for my family. For me, I have plenty of things to concentrate on that are not in the embassy. I have an organization to run. We have a dozen different court actions across the world. As time has gone by the legal and political situation has clarified, such that it has become an obvious and conspicuous injustice. That view is now the dominant view in Sweden, the United Kingdom and many other countries always had that view but these two countries are involved in a concrete way. The United States is a bit harder. Although there has been very hostile rhetoric in the United States — calling for my assassination, calling for WikiLeaks to be listed as a terrorist organization, calling for bills presented before congress to define me and all my staff as enemy combatants who can be killed and kidnapped at will — the U.S. is a large enough country that we do have a fair run in a number of U.S. media outlets; some of the small ones nearly all the time. But even the largest, even Fox News, occasionally. So we have a spectrum of support in the United States not always able to express itself, but sometimes it is and I think that is quite a hopeful sign when you consider the amount of demonization that has occurred from the national security state in the U.S. Here in the United Kingdom, as a result of my case, they changed the law last year to say that there should be no more extradition without charge. That only deals with one charge because we still have the U.S. case to deal with. But there is a growing realization that what is happening here is really unjust. You cannot have someone detained in Europe without charge for four-and-a half years. Everyone can see that there is something wrong with that. [UK change in law re extradition without charge would (I think) no longer apply, as Conservatives have pushed through adoption of EAW legislation that becomes effective by default (or something like that); and that legislation, as I understand, takes precedence over domestic laws.  Anyway, that's how I understood what was going on.  But maybe this needs another look-up.] Julian Assange is founder and editor-and-chief of WikiLeaks.  FULL ARTICLE @ SOURCE http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/An-Obvious-and-Conspicuous-Injustice-says-Assange-on-Asylum-20150314-0002.html EUROPEAN ARREST WARRANT Jacob Rees-Mogg on May's European Arrest Warrant claims JACOB REES-MOGG says:  after 1st of December, how EAW is implemented will not be decided by Britain; it will be decided by Court of Justice of the European Union.  So who can arrest British citizens will be ceded to Brussels.  COMMENT So that's a round-up of what's going on. Operation Get-Assange / WikiLeaks in summary: Beginning 2010 WikiLeaks publishing:  set off a major conflict with USG. USG whole govt investigation. More than a dozen different US Largest ever investigation into a publisher. Leading the investigation - Department of Justice: > National Security Division > Criminal Division > FBI boots on the ground. Multi-subject, ongoing, long-term, investigation WikiLeaks central target Not confined to the United States. Agencies involved incl. > National Security Agency (NSA) > CIA > Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) -  *CIA + DIA is publicly admitted (Snowden docs & Pentagon records) Activities: > NSA manhunt list in 2010 - Assange > US military intelligence spying on Assange - from 2009 onwards, Germany > FBI conducted its activities in Europe:  Iceland + Denmark + UK > US and/or Swedish intelligence conducted its activities in Sweden This investigation doesn't just affect WikiLeaks; it affects all journalists and publishers and, apparently, the US is aiming for worldwide jurisdiction (which is ridiculous ... unless you're an Evil Empire.)

Totalitarian Evil Empire, USA

TOTALITARIAN EVIL EMPIRE ASSANGE & MANNING SUPPORTER SURVEILLANCE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION / SEC STATE CLINTON - DODGED F.O.I VICE News ran the Hillary Clinton by-passes FOI story.   Here Is the State Department’s First 'Official' Release of a Hillary Clinton Email https://news.vice.com/article/here-is-the-state-departments-first-official-release-of-a-hillary-clinton-email Maybe VICE are going to back the Republicans this election?  Or maybe that evil old bat isn't going to be a popular candidate with anybody, if she's running for office. Check out what a loathsome individual this woman is: Hillary Clinton:   "We came, we saw, he died ... [laughter]" Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. CBS exposes Hillary Clinton's lies:  'sniper fire' Bosnia Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research.  NOAM CHOMSKY - NATO Bombing Serbia Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Nobody deserves to die like Gaddafi did, and the US has no right to bomb sovereign European or African nations. Only a sick and twisted individual would lie and find brutal murder amusing. Of course, a sick and twisted USA also 'excuses' itself and gives itself the right to commit genocide (see Chomsky video above). Anyway, Killary's been using private e-mail for State business, which is a US federal law no-no, because State business needs to be archived on government servers to enable public access. Hillary Clinton has a pattern of lying & denying public scrutiny: I had also informed Hillary that the Douglas impeachment files were available for public inspection in the committee offices. She later removed the Douglas files without my permission and carried them to the offices of the impeachment inquiry staff-where they were no longer accessible to the public. [Jerry Zeifman] VICE Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Among the private e-mails is a communication concerning a DoJ subpoena issued to Twitter -- yep, Twitter, for f*ck's sake (lol) -- concerning information about Assange and 'certain individuals' who support Assange and Manning. On the basis of Hillary Clinton's history of unethical conduct in relation to matters of State and public interest, as disclosed by Jerry Zeifman, Hillary Clinton's use of private e-mail in relation to the Manning and Assange matters sure smacks of something dirty going on in the US State Department. That aside, that the US State Department is harassing people on social media and encroaching on their lives (wherever they may be), irrespective of their right to privacy, freedom of expression, and a right to political freedom, demonstrates beyond any doubt that the United States really is an Evil Empire. Everything they claim to represent - 'freedom', 'democracy', 'the people' and the rest of propaganda for the gullible - is, of course, an outright lie. United States is an evil, totalitarian, empire run by criminals. Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. FLASHBACK: Hillary Clinton Fired From Watergate Investigation For ‘Lying, Unethical Behavior’ Excerpted from EO-History: The now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised Hillary when she worked on the Watergate investigation, says Hillary’s history of lies and unethical behavior goes back farther – and goes much deeper – than anyone realizes. Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career. Why? “Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.” How could a 27-year-old House staff member do all that? She couldn’t do it by herself, but Zeifman said she was one of several individuals – including Marshall, special counsel John Doar and senior associate special counsel (and future Clinton White House Counsel) Bernard Nussbaum – who engaged in a seemingly implausible scheme to deny Richard Nixon the right to counsel during the investigation. Why would they want to do that? Because, according to Zeifman, they feared putting Watergate break-in mastermind E. Howard Hunt on the stand to be cross-examined by counsel to the president. Hunt, Zeifman said, had the goods on nefarious activities in the Kennedy Administration that would have made Watergate look like a day at the beach – including Kennedy’s purported complicity in the attempted assassination of Fidel Castro. [...]  Zeifman says that Hillary, along with Marshall, Nussbaum and Doar, was determined to gain enough votes on the Judiciary Committee to change House rules and deny counsel to Nixon. And in order to pull this off, Zeifman says Hillary wrote a fraudulent legal brief, and confiscated public documents to hide her deception. EXTRACT ONLY - FULL AT SOURCE http://patdollard.com/2013/05/flashback-hillary-clinton-fired-from-watergate-investigation-for-lying-unethical-behavior-conspiracy-to-violate-the-constitution/ No way known can anybody expect to get justice in USA - ever. "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana It may help you to remember this bit of history regarding Hillary Rodham Clinton.... Of course, Nixon’s resignation rendered the entire issue moot, ending Hillary’s career on the Judiciary Committee staff in a most undistinguished manner. Zeifman says he was urged by top committee members to keep a diary of everything that was happening. He did so, and still has the diary if anyone wants to check the veracity of his story. Certainly, he could not have known in 1974 that diary entries about a young lawyer named Hillary Rodham would be of interest to anyone 34 years later. But they show that the pattern of lies, deceit, fabrications and unethical behavior was established long ago – long before the Bosnia lie, and indeed, even before cattle futures, Travelgate and Whitewater – for the woman who is still asking us to make her president of the United States. EXTRACT ONLY - FULL AT SOURCE http://www.eohistory.info/2013/hillaryHistory.htm Source:  sodahead.com Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. VIDEO LINKS Hillary Clinton:  "We came, we saw, he died ... [laughter]" https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FmIRYvJQeHM CBS exposes Hillary Clinton Bosnia 'sniper fire' lies https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8BfNqhV5hg4 NOAM CHOMSKY - NATO Bombing Serbia https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oiMD7BghkVo