AUDIO TRANSCRIPT - 'John Pilger on WikiLeaks, Julian Assange & Jeremy Corbyn' - Radio NZ National

AUDIO TRANSCRIPT  [For quotation purposes, confirm audio] Title:  John Pilger on WikiLeaks, Julian Assange & Jeremy Corbyn "John Pilger is an Australian born journalist and film-maker who has twice won Britain's Journalist of the Year award." Originally aired on Sunday Morning, Sunday 23 August 2015 PROGRAM LINK | http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/sunday/audio/201767629/john-pilger-on-wikileaks,-julian-assange-and-jeremy-corbyn DIRECT LINK AUDIO | http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player/201767629 ---------------------- ꕤ  ---------------------- Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National For 3 years, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, has sought asylum within the Ecuadorian embassy, London, at a cost of millions of pounds. He has been facing sexual assault allegations, which actually expired this past week, although he can still face charges on a rape allegation for a further 5 years. John Pilger is an Australian-born journalist & film-maker. He's twice won Britain's Journalist of the Year Award. And he says it's been an unrelenting campaign by Sweden and the US to deny Julian Assange justice and, of course, his freedom. John Pilger is in no doubt about the impact that Julian Assange and WikiLeaks has on society. John Pilger Investigative Journalist I think it's had a huge impact on both society and on journalism. I mean, the best of journalism, in my experience, always relied on what we called 'whistleblowers.' People from inside who can tell us the things that vested interests and governments don't want us to know; and I think they've done that with such a dimension that we now have quite a different standard of investigative journalism, now, to reach. And as far as society is concerned, I think they've told people what so many people — millions of people — suspected anyway: that their governments weren't telling them the truth; and that vested interests weren't telling them the truth; that they were being deceived; that democracy wasn't working properly; that there wasn't the kind of accountability that they suspected. WikiLeaks' contribution to that, I think, has been quite extraordinary. Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National It's been compared, hasn't it, to Daniel Ellsberg's revelation of the Pentagon Papers (US war related secrets of 1971). Do you think that's a fair or valid comparison? John Pilger Investigative Journalist Yes, it is. Absolutely. I know Dan Ellsberg and I've talked to him about it and he makes that comparison. That he's very much a supporter of WikiLeaks now. And Ellsberg — what Ellsberg released (and this was a whistleblower from within the system), he — the Pentagon Papers actually told the truth about the Vietnam war. It told the truth — the kind of official truth that people didn't know. They were official documents, and they really had an extraordinary impact then on public opinion. They supported that all-truth that information is power. People then had information. Now, what people do with information is up to them. But to be able to get it — as they got it through Ellsberg, and they got it through WikiLeaks, and they got it through Chelsea Manning, and they got it through numerous other very courageous whistleblowers. That's very important, and it's a lesson for us journalists. Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National The nature of the whilsteblower. Let me ask you this, then, John. Daniel Ellsberg over 40 years ago, Julian Assange now — to some, you know, to many he's a hereo (people like Yoko Ono & Ken Loach have visited him at the Ecuadorian embassy) — but what was the - what did people think of Daniel Ellsberg at the time, because there's been quite a level of vitriol to Julian Assange. How was Daniel Ellsberg treated by the public and by the establishment. John Pilger Investigative Journalist I think Ellsberg was also, really, was subjected to a certain level of vitriol. Usually, whistleblowers are. I remember Ellsberg actually being called a traitor. Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National [Interjects] Really? John Pilger Investigative Journalist — and, indeed, he won his court actions, which were really based on that broad allegation that he'd committed some form of treason. So, you know, his character was called into question and so on, in a different way from the attacks on Julian Assange. Another great whistleblower — long forgotten — who's now the subject of a movie called, interestingly, 'Shoot the Messenger,' whose name is Gary Webb:   Gary Webb disclosed, in the United States, that — how the CIA was involved in drug trafficking into the United States. Now, Gary Webb's greatest enemies were the rest of media, who hadn't got the story and attacked him. Something similar has happened with Julian Assange. It's certainly muddied by the fact that he was caught in a situation in Sweden, which those who were his enemies, anyway, were able to exploit. And — but, my understanding (and I've known Assange for quite some time and I followed this case very quickly) is, that the amount of vitriol comes down to the degree of truth-telling: truth-telling about great power. There is — and I've found this in my career — there is a real ruthlessness in great power:   be it in governments, big corporations, vested interests — particularly in very, very powerful governments.  There is a ruthlessness in their response, if you expose what they are doing, and if it's something they don't want the public to know about. Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National And you've experienced it yourself? John Pilger Investigative Journalist Yes, I have, most certainly, in a lot of the work I've done right throughout south-east Asia and in investigative work in the UK. For example, I had a lot to do with revealing the thalidomide — the extent that thalidomide, the drug, was was damaging children. I found myself subjected to all kinds of abuse and smear. Smear. Smear is probably an investigative journalist's greatest enemy. There was a very interesting document that WikiLeaks got hold of in 2008 which foretold everything — [laughs] almost everything - that has happened to Julian Assange. It said that (and I paraphrase it) - that if - that, because WikiLeaks was revealing so many of these truths, the only way to deal with it was to discredit it, and to discredit Assange. To smear, in other words. I mean, it really spells it out, in very plain English, that there's going to be a campaign of discrediting against anyone like Assange who dares to tell the public the kinds of secrets that it needs to know, that it's prevented from knowing. Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National Well, in fact, you say on Julian Assange — you write that in Alexandria, Virginia, a secret grand jury spent 5 years attempting to contrive a crime for which Assange can be prosecuted. Can you explain a little bit for us, what do you mean by that? John Pilger Investigative Journalist Well, yes. I mean, that's, that's — they've admitted that now. There is, in Virginia, which — the grand jury in the United States— The grand juries draw from the area in which they sit. Now this area [laughs] has in it the US Defence Department, the Pentagon, the CIA, and all the great institutions of American power, so that determines, really, the character of the grand jury. And the grand jury can then issue indictments. Now, this grand jury has been sitting in secret, now, for several years, and the problem it faces in trying to bring a charge against Assange and WikiLeaks is that the constitution (the US constitution), says very clearly that whistleblowers — truth-tellers — are protected it (by the Constitution) and, ironically, it was President Obama (a professor of constitutional law) who said, very early in his presidency, that whilstleblowers had the protection of the constitution. Now, I say 'ironically,' because more whistleblowers have been prosecuted under Obama than during all the presidents of the past. So, this grand jury has an uphill task, and the one charge it seems that it might be able to come up with is a First World War espionage charge, which was really directed at conscientious objectors during the First World War, all those years ago: a century ago. That's all it can find. The problem there is that Julian Assange isn't an American. That never seams to bother American courts that people — there are some people in the world who are not Americans. So, it's a difficult thing. But there's no question that what the documents show — the FBI has something like a 50,000 page file on him — what all these documents that have come out have shown, and what they've virtually admitted: that the moment Assange sets out the door of the Ecuadorian embassy in London, in some way — in some way — the United States (with help from its so-called allies) will get its hands on Julian Assange. Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National And is that why the 24 hour around the clock police cordon? There are police appearing — John Pilger Investigative Journalist Well, no because [laughs] — they don't prevent people going in, but Assange isn't going anywhere. All that is, this 24-hour cordon, it's theatrical. It's a show of force by the state. It's the British government saying — and the Metropolitan Police in London — saying: Well, we're not having this. How dare this man go and seek political refuge and be granted it by another government. It's pointless — Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National [Interjects] John — John Pilger Investigative Journalist — one policeman outside the door is more than enough because, as everybody knows, Assange isn't going anywhere. Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National I'm speaking with Julian As— John Pilger. And there are those who listen to this, too, who will say that there — these, you know, these charges — these allegations — they— John Pilger Investigative Journalist [Interjects] You've got to be careful with that. That's a very common slip. And I understand you make it.  There— Assange has been — The disgrace about all of this is this man has not been charged with anything.  What's more, that the original prosecutor in this case in Sweden, threw it out — threw allegations out — and the second prosecutor, who has perused him, allowed him to leave Sweden, and said that's fine. The second prosecutor has been offered every facility to question Julian Assange over 5 years. The British government has pleaded with her, virtually, to come to London. It's a normal procedure. At the same time, Sweden has (in London) interviewed something like 44 other people connected with allegations in Sweden, but not Assange. Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National So what's going on here — why? John Pilger Investigative Journalist Why? Well, I think it's a combination of reasons, here. There's no evidence — that's number one. I've seen the evidence; there's no evidence. Both these women have said they were not raped. They've both said it's consensual — it was consensual sex. Their SMS messages — one says the police have tried to railroad them into this. The pressures on these two women have been extraordinary. One can only have — one can only have sympathy for them. It's a combination of whys. There's an obsession about this prosecutor, and my sense is that the Swedish authorities haven't quite known what to do about it. The Swedish High Court has reprimanded her for not getting on with the case. Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National Is this Marianne Ny? John Pilger Investigative Journalist Yes, Marianne Ny. Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National What's the relationship, John, between Swe— Washington and Stockholm?  Is, because Sweden is, you know, meant to be something of a liberal bastion, isn't it? So what is— John Pilger Investigative Journalist [Interjects] Well— Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National —what sort of relationship do they have? John Pilger Investigative Journalist Well, Sweden is not a liberal bastion. Sweden has basked in its—   It is in some areas, yes.  It has enlightened social policies towards the vulnerable and the elderly, and so on, although these have been much broken down over the years. But, in a cultural sense, that image of Sweden going back to the 1960s, as a great libertarian country, no longer exists. Sweden has rather a dark side. It's not a member of NATO, but it's almost a much more committed associate of the United States in that part of the world, and the last government in Sweden had very close links with the extreme right in the Republican party, and it has various associations in the arms business, and so on. So Sweden has a— Swe— Swe— I suppose Sweden plays the same games that countries within a certain sphere of do these days. It is no different from that. But what it does have, as I mentioned, is a very close relationship with the US, and The Independent newspaper, here, revealed that there had been discussions between the Swedish authorities and the US on Assange. I don't think that anyone really has any serious doubts that should Assange go to Sweden (where there is no bail —therefore he goes— would go straight into prison regardless of having not been charged with anything) — that once confined — that something similar would happen to him, as has happened to other people who have been subjected to rendition to the United States from Sweden. This is all guess work, of course, but the assumption has a great deal of credibility. Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National John Pilger, how do you think, then, this will all play out? He's been, what, 3 years inside the Ecuadorian embassy. As I understand it — you might have gone and visited him — but, as I understand it, no sunlight, small room. Ken Loach, the film director, he gave him a walker, I think, one of those exerciser machines, didn't he? John Pilger Investigative Journalist Yes. Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National So, what's going to happen, is my question? John Pilger Investigative Journalist I see Julian Assange regularly, and I've been to the embassy many times.  And, it's really — inside, it's like your living room and my living room.  Yes, sunlight comes in through the windows, but with the police pretty well outside, you have to keep the curtains closed, otherwise you have a member of the constabulary looking in on you and, so, it's a very confined space. And it's the kind of thing that no human being should have to go through. It's the sort of detention that, really, is against all the post war covenants of human rights and so on. But it is a place of refuge, and that's why he's there. Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National Finally, John Pilger, I just — before you go, I just wonder if you've got a couple of thoughts on the Labour leadership in the UK — Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader contender - he continues to do well in the polls. In fact, the press has dubbed it 'Corbyn Mania.' His views are very much to the left of the Labour mainstream: he wants to, you know, withdraw from NATO; abolish the UK's nuclear arsenal. So, where, can I ask you, where is he drawing his support, and why do you think it's happening? John Pilger Investigative Journalist It says something about the mainstream [laughs] when you describe it that way. Jeremy Corbyn is actually the mainstream. And who these people are - it's such fun to watch them so hysterical over somebody who might be democratically elected by ordinary people. What a terrible thing to happen. They used to call this democracy. But because they've stitched up the system for such a long time; especially, since the rise of Tony Blair and his evangelical followers, who dominate the Labour party, still; because this man who has rather moderate views and old fashioned views (the kind of old fashioned views that most people subscribe to), and because people are so frustrated all over the world — I'm sure it's true in New Zealand, as well (it certainly is in Australia) — are frustrated that there isn't a functioning democracy; that the views of people - the frustrations of people — are not reflected by their politicians. Suddenly, out comes a man who, first of all, he's completely incorruptible; he's decent; he doesn't abuse people; he doesn't play all their games; he doesn't want to go to war with countries; he doesn't want to bomb countries; he doesn't want to see people impoverished; and he doesn't want to see extremely rich interests make off with billions of pounds. So having these outrageous views — thoroughly 'outrageous,' 'extremist' views - Jeremy Corbyn has attracted an enormous support from people. I was in Edinburgh recently and I gave a talk, and I would have thought that, probably, most of the people in the audience had voted for the SNP — voted for Independent — gee, were they interested in Corbyn, even up there. So, don't know. I think it's very likely the elected leader of the Labour party whether he can get through and keep that rather corrupted organisation in a shape that it might win the election, I have no idea. But he's certainly given people — he's cheered people up. He's given them a sense that maybe some things are possible. Wallace Chapman Presenter, Radio NZ National Journalist and film-maker, John Pilger, thank you very much for your time. John Pilger Investigative Journalist You're very welcome. Bye, Bye. ——— end audio ——— Please Support journalist Julian Assange Under Siege Ecuador embassy London (3 Years) Detained 5 Years No Charge FAQ & Support https://justice4assange.com/ ꕤ

Thomas Drake Interview - Transcripts - Series of Five (5)

Espionage Act Case USA (One of Few) Thomas Drake US Air Force / short stint CIA  /  US Navy veteran ex NSA / computers / whistleblower   "I flew in RC-135s, listening in on the Warsaw Pact. I became--the target country in which I became an expert as a crypto linguist was East Germany." " ... says he was targeted by the NSA because he exposed that the agency had intel that could have prevented the 9/11 attacks and because he blew the whistle on a massive secret surveillance program aimed at Americans -   August 2, 2015" "In 2010 the government alleged that he 'mishandled' documents, one of the few such Espionage Act cases in U.S. history. His defenders claim that he was instead being persecuted for challenging the Trailblazer Project."  [therealnews] Transcript Interview #1 - http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=14393 Transcript Interview #2 - http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=14395 Transcript Interview #3 - http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=14399 Transcript Interview #4 - http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=14405 Transcript Interview #5 - http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=14423 ---------------------- ꕤ  ---------------------- SUMMARY Part 1 NSA Key stakeholder = Congress, particularly the intelligence committees   Raised objections to NSA having knowledge re  9/11 & not making use of that knowledge to prevent 9/11 Objections internal - then public. Waste of multibillion-dollar mass surveillance program / he thought violated the Fourth Amendment USA - dragnet electronic surveillance indicted whistleblower  /  no prison NSA - had 9/11 knowledge  / at issue what NSA actually knew what they should have known what they didn't share what they kept hidden info they never even discovered until later   "I consider NSA quite culpable.  ... extraordinarily culpable. And they've been covering up their culpability ever since" *NSA did not not share intel properly with national command authorities massive multibillion-dollar fraud   mass surveillance regime put into place in the deepest of secrecy NSA didn't like Drake 'speaking truth to power" - witness various investigations. 2007 FBI raid of house and office (National Defence University). Indictment   "I was very publicly indicted on a ten felony count indictment, five under the Espionage Act, facing 35 years in prison." April 2010 was an exciting month: April 5th, 2010 - here WikiLeaks releases Collateral Murder video April 15, 2010 - here Thomas Drake indicted "DRAKE:  My eyes were wide open coming into NSA. Some people have this idea that somehow I was naive coming into NSA. In fact, I was actually--my sanity was questioned as to whether or not I really wanted to join NSA. JAY: And your first day of the NSA is actually 9/11. DRAKE: First day I reported. I actually took the oath prior. It was all in processing. But the first day that I reported to my new job was the morning of 9/11." Post 9/11 US govt operating in equivalent of secret marital law "verbal authority from the White House, authorizing NSA to start spying on the U.S. on an extraordinary scale, starting with phone numbers and special arrangements of certain telephone companies, starting with AT&T" " ... eyewitness to the subversion of the Constitution. " Oath to defend "Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic." [NSA] "... had what they call cast-iron coverage on the Yemeni switchboard, the safe house. They'd been monitoring that safe house since at least 1996. It's an absolute lie of the U.S. government to say that we didn't know about the two hijackers in San Diego, for example. Absolute lie." "... when confronted with the prospect of fessing up, NSA chose instead to obstruct the 9/11 congressional investigation, play dumb, and keep the truth buried, including the fact that it knew about all inbound and outbound calls to the safe house switchboard in Yemen. " ---------------------- ꕤ  ---------------------- COMMENT That's it for my lame summary. I'm not really into the 9/11 stuff and I'm not up for the summary of another 4 parts of the interview. Thought it was good to post here for anybody who might be more interested than I am. Might just quickly skim a few more bits of the interviews to see if there's anything earth-shattering in them that I might otherwise miss.  lol ꕤ

UK–US Extradition Treaty of 2003 - Laurie Love Extradition to US - Preliminary Hearing Oct 2015

2007 - Ambassador Tuttle and Baroness Scotland ratifing the bilateral extradition treaty between the U.S. and the UK [source:  here] COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER 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.

Home › News › Lauri Love discusses why he fears US extradition Lauri Love discusses why he fears US extradition After being re-arrested by British authorities, Lauri Love has spoken to the BBC about why he wants to be tried in the UK rather than be extradited to the US: I would say my prospects of due process in America are essentially zero, and the prospect of extradition is tantamount to a punishment worse than any punishment from the UK justice system. The BBC includes a brief video of Love talking about the toll his case has taken thus far, “My parents and me are quite stressed. I have had time to acclimatise. My dad has had a heart condition and my mum is a natural worrier.” Love has not been charged with a crime in the UK, even though that’s where the alleged offences occurred. “The charges should be heard here… where 12 of my peers should be found to try me,” Love said. See our extradition page to see why “the UK-USA extradition treaty, ratified by the US Senate in 2006 and implemented in 2007, is fundamentally skewed towards misuse by the US Department of Justice. Love has a preliminary hearing in October before the proper extradition hearing in December. Support his legal defence fund here. See the BBC’s full story here. SOURCE https://freelauri.com/2015/08/16/lauri-love-discusses-why-he-fears-us-extradition/ Support Laurie Love The Courage Foundation https://freelauri.com/donate ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- FURTHER US Persecution of Whistleblowers, Activists, Journalists Persecuted US whistleblowers, activists and journalists Jeremy Hammond Barrett Brown Aaron Swartz Chelsea Manning USA:  Over-Prosecution / Extremely Harsh Sentences US government: aggressively over-prosecuted  threatening extremely long prison sentences (producing intense pressure for deals and pleas) ---------------------- ꕤ  ---------------------- SOLITARY CONFINEMENT / TORTURE extensive use of solitary confinement as punishment prolonged use of solitary confinement: deemed torture by every major human rights group USA solitary confinement / torture = routine form of punishment for even the smallest infractions without concern for prisoners’ mental health ---------------------- ꕤ  ---------------------- UK-USA extradition treaty ratified by US Senate 2006 (implemented in 2007) fundamentally skewed towards misuse by the US Dept of Justice. designed for terrorism suspects allows the US to extradite British citizens for breaking US laws, even if the offence committed in the UK Reverse does not apply:  Britain may not extradite US citizens. ---------------------- ꕤ  ---------------------- Low Burden of Proof *Therefore US extradition readily obtained, without sufficient proof to warrant extradition. Zero successful extraditions of American citizens committing a crime while on US soil (since 2007) versus 77 British citizens extradited to the US without the right to contest evidence without any legal aid to assist with trial in America ---------------------- ꕤ  ---------------------- NOTE:  multiple areas of judicial imbalance ---------------------- ꕤ  ---------------------- UK Home Affairs Select Committee = report calling for significant reform (2012) Conservative-led govt failed to respond "Lauri Love must be allowed to contest the allegations against him in the United Kingdom. To properly defend himself in court, he needs substantial support for his legal defense fund." SOURCE https://freelauri.com/fighting-extradition/ ---------------------- ꕤ  ---------------------- UK–US extradition treaty of 2003 *Opposition* Link (historical) - here ---------------------- ꕤ  ---------------------- EXTRACT Press Release UK/U.S. Extradition Treaty Ratified 26 April 2007 The United Kingdom and United States have today ratified a bilateral extradition treaty to ensure more effective arrangements to bring offenders from either state to justice.  [ lol .. it's skewed] SOURCE:  http://london.usembassy.gov/ukpapress48.html UK–US extradition treaty of 2003 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK%E2%80%93US_extradition_treaty_of_2003 ---------------------- ꕤ  ---------------------- Other Please support journalist, Julian Assange Under Siege Ecuador embassy, London (3 Years) Detained 5 Years No Charge FAQ & Support https://justice4assange.com/  ꕤ

Mainstream Journalism - New Business Model - Lipstick on a Pig

Andrew Fowler: 'Why journalism is in decline' Opinion The Drum By Jessica Tapp Posted 3 Aug 2015, 11:30pm  Mon 3 Aug 2015, 11:30pm Author and journalist Andrew Fowler takes a look at a media industry in flux, and tells The Drum what factors are contributing to a decline in quality journalism. Journalist and author Andrew Fowler says a lack of trust and failed business models are contributing to a decline in journalism. Mr Fowler has outlined the problem in his new book, The War on Journalism - Media Moguls, Whistleblowers and The Price of Freedom. Speaking to The Drum, he said the declining confidence in the media was contributing to a disconnect between the mainstream media and their sources. "People with information very often don't trust the existing news media, they tend to go to people outside," he said. "For example, (Edward) Snowden went to Glenn Greenwald who was a freelancer who then got the story published in The Guardian, but there's a lot of pressure from Greenwald to get that story up before the story finally appeared." The Guardian published a series of Greenwald's articles revealing America's National Security Agency was collecting the phone records of millions of customers of one of the USA's largest telecommunications providers. The leaked documents also showed the NSA was permitted to use and retain information from US communications, including emails and internet usage. "Bradley, or Chelsea Manning as she is now, actually didn't go to the newspapers, she didn't go to The New York Times, she went to this outfit who nobody knew at the time, called Wikileaks," Mr Fowler said. "Wikileaks were the people that actually then did the deal with The Guardian." Mainstream media disconnect Mr Fowler said the way the NSA files were leaked shows the changing relationship in how the media gets its information. "It's an interesting area to look at to understand why those things occurred," he said. "What it shows you is that one of the reasons why the mainstream media is in such a crisis is that people have really lost confidence in it, not only because the money itself has dried up so they really can't fund the kind of investigations that they did in the past, but also because they think that they tend to go downmarket to compete with the internet. "You get clickbait stories ... which really are just trash, and flop." Losing money, losing power Mr Fowler said the drop in profits, particularly for print media, had made it difficult for journalists to fund good reporting. "I think governments and corporate interests have become more and more powerful and more and more controlling of journalists," he said. "As journalists we've become weaker as the rivers of gold, as (Rupert) Murdoch famously called them, have dried up. "Then the governments and the large corporations have really made a great play of that and have fed news organisations pretty easy to digest news that they can run." He said the public was aware of the changing power dynamic. "It's a very difficult situation because there's no money ... so the problem is how do you get out of that issue?" Failing business models Mr Fowler said he wanted to see a new business model to keep funding quality journalism. "Unless you do, the fourth estate which is the fourth pillar that stands against the other three pillars of the realm will fall. And for democracy - and it sounds awfully large call to make - but for democracy it's a really dangerous time," he said.  [Fascism followed by revolution?  lol] "As far as I can see there has been no major investigation of how this failure occurred because most newspapers were in denial until they finally got clobbered with the reality." Echo chambers Mr Fowler blamed pay walls for making it easier for people to seek out the stories that only match their views or interests. "What you want is a mix in the newspaper where you get people reading good, strong stuff like investigations done by The Herald Sun or done by The Age, mixed in with light stories that people will want to read," he said. "The (Financial Review) behind a pay wall is all very well, but I want the Fin Review read by other people than just those people who have blue chip stock. "I don't want this narrow casting because narrow casting means that people live in an echo chamber and that breeds all sorts of problems: extremism, people with prejudice only reading what they want to read, never being exposed to a big idea." But haven't people always read particular newspapers because it aligns with their views? Mr Fowler denied it and said there was value in a diversity of news and opinion. "Sometimes they get surprised." Jessica Tapp is a journalist with ABC's DrumTV http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-04/tapp-why-journalism-is-in-decline/6670076  --------------------- COMMENT New business model?  Lipstick on a pig, more like it. Goodbye fascism lite & hello full-on corporate fascism controlled media and society? Meh, what's the difference?  LOL Seriously, mainstream journalism is deception & has always been deception. The main reason I support journalism is because I want everyone *else* to have a voice (ie public and alternative press), and I don't think you can have that without having a free press.  Freedom of expression and freedom of speech is more important to me, but it's not like you can have those personal and political freedoms without also having a free press.  As for mainstream journalism, that's largely the corporate & government agenda and propaganda voice. No major investigation needed.  See enough mainstream media propaganda in action and read about CIA bribes, journalists obtaining government agency approval before printing, CIA controlled media of the Cold War era, willing newspaper editors obliging the government and so on, and mainstream media cancels itself out. And who seriously wants to know what Rupert Murdoch's or Gina Rinehardt's paper wants to proclaim ... you just read that stuff for bare details and the occasional laugh. Big idea?  Big idea, or big lie?  Think the press is just lamenting that it's harder to pull the wool over everyone's eyes these days.  Not sure how they propose to expose everybody to 'diversity' and 'opinion' when all mainstream output is from the position of the establishment (or a certain brand of smug, sanctimonious, preachy left), which is said to represent the limits of debate.  I'm guessing more and more people aren't interested in what they have to say because the internet gives people options they've never had. Fascists will probably shut down the internet and we'll be stuck with watching the evening news and reading one of a couple of daily newspapers. Don't know how money is made out of news.  News is like tissues.  It's throw-away:  as soon as you have the key facts and the buzz of the newness of it, it's dead news.  PS   I've figured out what I don't like about mainstream media.  Don't like the whole presenter thing and being presented with whatever is deemed 'suitable', being presented with somebody else's agenda, the propriety of it all, the political correctness, the seriousness, the 'we are authorities' play-acting, the entire canned for public consumption fakery of TV news ... as well the fact that you KNOW they and the printed press will never present news that goes against US-allied foreign policy (well, you eventually learn if you bother to look).  But you instinctively know because the story is always the same, the state 'enemies' are always the same etc.  It's all about upholding the establishment position, whatever that position may be. The biggest threat to journalism is government, which is afraid of whistleblowers and of the internet.  The government is cracking down on the media and on civil liberties, to prevent exposure from perhaps a media that now needs to work harder than it has ever done, as it is in competing with a whistleblower publisher (or maybe more), and needs to maybe start looking a little more real? And this talk of 'democracy' is nonsense.  It is, and always has been, a plutocracy. I'm starting to think that any threat to journalism (other than government) is probably hyped up nonsense.  The bulk of the population will always be mainstream media dependent, and I think very few people will ever stick their necks on the block as whistleblowers.   I'm still having serious trouble believing the Defence Dept 4Chan leak story. It's probably a fake, like those false flag ops, to provide a pretext for ever growing controls on the media and the public.  Ummm ... can you have fake court cases?  If you can have faked 'attacks' one must defend with military response, faked  weapons of mass destruction, and faked allegations etc, etc, why not also have yourself some fake court cases? lol  [I've not slept much and I've just bashed this rant out.  So if it doesn't make a lot of sense, that'd be why.  lol]

CLOUD COMPUTING & SURVELLANCE: Caspar Bowden - European Parliament - Oct 2012 (Video)

Source:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yIJQPeYOn9Y#t=0 Caspar Bowden forsees PRISM in October 2012 Secret access by foreign govts in context of cloud computing: Cloud providers are transnational companies ... [Caspar Bowden 2012] subject to conflicts of international public law. Biggest threat not from Patriot Act but from a law still largely unknown. ... the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Amendment Act 2008 Cloud computing a grave threat to sovereignty of European data None of the regulatory proposals so far [2012] appreciated the gravity of the situation. Details of FISA unknown to Commission or data protection authorities until 2011. ... without any of the safeguards applicable to US citizens (in direct contradiction to what public told in EU Parliament). FISAAA passed 2008 to legalise surveillance which US govt began circa 9/11, which became known as 'warrantless wiretapping'. Mass surveillance of interl communications using super computers to trawl through data has been practised for a long time. The system known as Echelon was itself investigated by the European Parliament in 2000. Question that led to warrantless wiretapping scandal was: *had Americans had been caught up in intl surveillance systems?* Note: 'warrantless wiretapping' (ie mass US surveillance) scandal = issue in 2012, prior to Snowden expose (May 2013) Recommended: Find speech of William Binney, one of whilsteblowers @ NY conference in June & consider yourself implications. William Binney: a crypto-mathematician & NSA senior official nearly 40 years LINK: Interview: June 14, 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErRQeQd39zw William Binney was NSA engineer who built a vast data mining system for NSA, designed for mass surveillance, foreign & intl. European policy makers have not understood that they were intended the targets of the surveillance system that Binney built. Under Euro Convention of Human Rights & EU fundamental rights = illegal to discriminate protection according to nationality. Everyone in the jurisdiction of Europe has an equal right to have their privacy protected from unjustified surveillance. FISAAA only protects US persons. Europe = legitimate purpose of covert surveillance is LIMITED to combating serious crime & national or economic security. Europe: one member state cannot lawfully spy on another member's citizens merely for some foreign policy objective/advantage. FISAAA expressly authorises surveillance of info with respect to foreign-based political organisation (or territory) ... [FISAAA authority] ... that relates to the affairs of the United States. [Pretty much covers everywhere - blanket authority] FISAAA vastly broader definition than anything that is lawful under ECHR, so foreigners' data in the cloud could be scanned ie. Given broad FISAAA authority 2008, foreign data in the cloud could be scanned by USA for purely political surveillance. Any data that was moved to cloud that was previously processed on EU org premises has been vulnerable. A.29 working party issued opinion on cloud computing Far from waking up to risks of mass surveillance, they endorse mechanisms A.29 endorse mech's devised decade ago eg. outsourcing direct marketing & call centres as suitable 4 cloud computing COLOSSAL RISK A.29 warning prohibit direct disclosures by cloud providers to non-EU govts, unless this falls within established international agreements However, A.29 believes the real risk comes from Patriot Act & case by case demands for data. No appreciation of risk .. A.29 no appreciation of risk of continuous & systematic mass surveillance of cloud data. Software fabric of US cloud providers is maintained from ops centres in US, so mass surveillance possible through remote control [Cloud providers: ops centres in US] so, USG can secretly order companies to comply to demand for access to Euro cloud data. Any data put into clouds can be accessed directly & secretly by USA, to bypass agreements covering law enforcement sector US can bypass: eg PNR & Swift Agreements etc. A.29 fully envisage & *permit* secret disclosures of data / loopholes have already been built in. Encrypt. data to & from cloud irrelevant b/c FISAAA lets data extraction from inside data centre after data decrypted for processing No way EU data protect. authority can know if cloud is wiretapped, if software powering cloud controlled out EU jurisdiction Mass surveillance of cloud would be done in software using power of cloud itself to scan & filter data for further analysis Huge new data centres belonging to NSA are being built for this purpose. No commercial audit process can possibly uncover secret use of national security laws of another country. Until problem is fixed by revising US legislation or treaty, only prudent policy is a) physically confining cloud facilities ... .. under exclusive EU jurisdiction. b) using open-source software b/c backdoor insertion risk in closed-source software. FISAAA can order backdoor insertion into closed-source software. Closing legal loopholes for cloud surveillance is not enough, however. Not credible that national data protection authorities can mount effective enforcement actions v. coys size of Microsoft or Google $1-billion fine on Microsoft for competition offences took the EU nearly 10 yrs, while Microsoft derived profits in excess. Coys can afford to lawyer up to tie cases in knots. Same thing will happen w. fines under regulations & 2% = small cost of business. ie. 2% = small cost of doing business to access the 5-million consumers of the EU Need: dedicated & centrally operating prosecution authority for major cases of transnational data protection enforcement. Also need: capacity to fight long legal battles with adequate professional resources.  New Board & independence of Comm. influence. Only in this way can enforcement become sufficiently credible to alter corporate behaviour. Deterrent to US companies ignoring EU protection law = very substantial rewards to be offered to corporate whistleblowers Need: corporate whitleblower rewards of sufficient size to overcome US secrecy laws & cast-iron legal protection, as well. Such methods have been effective against tax evasion & competition cases; why not data protection? It is not too late to wake up from the long sleepwalk towards an irreversible loss of data sovereignty. Unless 3rd countries prepared to offer Europeans the same protections they offer own citizens, the clouds will have to part. COMMENT Found this very interesting and have transcribed a rough take of what was presented before the EU Parliament by Caspar Bowden, in 2012. The current status of the proposals is unknown to me. What was also conveyed is that: European law prohibits state surveillance of the ordinary, lawful, democratic, political activities of individuals or groups. Somebody ought to let the British police and authorities know about this, as they're forever conducting aggressive spying and infiltration campaigns against political activists and protesters (Oh, and mass surveillance of ordinary citizens).