Welcome, Guest

 or  Register
NewsFeed

BREAKING NEWS * Julian Assange Arrested! * “Merged”
(04-14-2019, 02:34 PM)KOMMA Wrote:
(04-14-2019, 04:20 AM)sivil Wrote: I don't know about the US charges of hacking, not sure how they would prove that, but basically they say he broke in to a computer with Chelsea Manning, and that she would not have been able to do it herself.  Penalty is 5 years.  Now this Sweden thing was dropped 2 years ago, and they want to extradite him for that.  Basically any countries that he leaked embarassing but true information about are now mad at him and some of these "leaders" want revenge.  Sorry about those Paradise Papers.....

From what I've heard on-line, they're saying that after Assange was given the first download, Chelsea said she could access more and they're saying that Assange told her how to do it. So what they're saying is that Assange has the ability to hack American state computers. I think in his young life he was a bit of a hacker in Australia, although, my view is that he moved far beyond that low tech that existed in those days. He probably also moved beyond it for credibility reasons and decided to become a publisher for other whistleblowers and hackers. Assange was fully aware of the consequences of hacking and any sensible adult man would've done what Assange did in his position, as he clearly saw there was a market for hacked information that others were willing to provide. WIKILEAKS was born, as a non-profit to bring truth to the world, at the same time as protecting it's sources, and allowing the truth to be known. Assange has a brilliant mind, intelligent enough not to put himself into a position that is above the law.

As such, he broke no laws. He was the editor that looked at material that was provided, like any other editor would do that is working on any investigation. He released that information and the world's media published it. A very clever man, covered his back, by getting all of the journalists that published it involved.

We also have to remember that those newspaper corporations all made money on the back of the information that he released, he was the middle man in this case of investigative journalism.

His Q.C. brought up an important point, that as far as America is concerned, American journalists are covered by the constitution, but foreign journalists and publishers are not. That means that The Guardian newspaper are not covered by the American constitution either, as far as America is concerned.  I think you will also find that America was one of the countries that didn't sign up for UN's international Human Rights law. Although someone might like to clarify America's position on that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internatio...rights_law

For instance in the UN International Human Rights Law, there is also a children's charter as they have human rights too. One aspect of that charter is that children have to be asked whether they agree to anything that could impact upon them and their lives. So for instance, if it was explained to a child that using a mobile could then cause cancer to that child, and the child refused that mobile with that knowledge, than it would be illegal for that state to impose that reality onto that child, the same with the parents.  Now that is particularly relevant as parents have been imprisoned for malnourishing their children with veganism.

Hence, that is why I wrote about the fact that David Cameron's government was in contravention of the Human Right's law with the 'Bedroom Tax", because the government didn't ask the children if they could remove their bedrooms, when Cameron decided that children would have to share a bedroom. Basically, the state imposed their tax laws, that impacted upon children without their consent. No child would willingly give up their own bedroom, because a politician says that they must. I don't think you will find that the politicians told their own children that they would have to share bedrooms, to move into a smaller property to make way for immigrants that require their bedrooms.

The thing is that most politicians are not aware of human rights law that includes the Children's Charter.

I also remember years ago, Assange saying that the western governments had buried the UN Privacy laws because they are also in contravention of those too.
Heir  likes this!
Reply Share
Security footage shows Julian Assange in his living quarters.



MysticPizza  likes this!
Reply Share
Labour MP shows support for Julian Assange outside Belmarsh Prison.



Heir, Sami  likes this!
Reply Share
Former American BREITBART journalist in England at the Belmarsh Prison where Assange is being held.


Lee Stranahan full speech on Julian Assange's detention 14.14.2019



Sami  likes this!
Reply Share
http://theindicter.com/my-friend-julian-...in-london/

My Friend Julian Assange – Alicia Castro, ex ambassador in London
____________________________________
The Democrats have to decide to stop defrauding the country with ridiculous bullshit...Donald J Trump
KOMMA, MysticPizza, Sami  likes this!
Reply Share
Information 



Quote:On this edition of the program we discuss one and one issue only: the fate of Julian Assange and the fate of journalism itself. CrossTalking with Xavier Moreau, John Laughland, and Alexander Mercouris.
Where there is imbalance I am the counterweight. Beware, for if you are a cause of imbalance you may not enjoy my presence.
Reply Share
Information 



Quote:The timing was hardly "coincidental." Not long after a trip by Vice President Pence to "convince" Ecuador to hand over Julian Assange, a $4.2 billion IMF loan appears on the scene. Then Ecuador follows through and delivers the Wikileaks publisher to face the wrath of the US political establishment. Do what Washington says, get a bribe. Don't do what Washington says, get a bomb.
Where there is imbalance I am the counterweight. Beware, for if you are a cause of imbalance you may not enjoy my presence.
Reply Share


Where there is imbalance I am the counterweight. Beware, for if you are a cause of imbalance you may not enjoy my presence.
Reply Share
Bill Binney States that the NSA Has 32 Pages of Communications Between Seth Rich and Julian Assange, As Revealed by a FOIA Request

https://governmentslaves.news/2019/04/20...a-request/

About six months ago, a blogpost by “Publius Tacitus” appeared regarding attorney Ty Clevenger’s FOIA request regarding Seth Rich:


“But now there is new information that may corroborate what the human sources quoted in the Fox article claimed about Seth’s role in getting the DNC documents to Wikileaks. Borne from a FOIA request filed in November 2017 by attorney Ty Clevenger, who requested any information regarding Seth Rich and Julian Assange. The NSA informed Clevenger in a letter dated 4 October 2018 that:


Your request has been processed under the provisions of the FOIA. Fifteen documents (32 pages) responsive to your request have been reviewed by this Agency as required by the FOIA and have found to be currently and properly classified in accordance with Executive Order 13526. These documents meet the criteria for classification as set forth in Subparagraph © of Section 1.4 and remains classified TOP SECRET and SECRET.


If NSA had come back and said, “No, we do not have anything pertaining to Seth Rich,” that would have been news. It would have been especially unwelcome news for those who believe that Seth was the source on the DNC emails. But now the opposite is true. The NSA says that it has documents that are classified TS and S. What do those documents say or prove? That remains to be seen.”

At the time this appeared, I felt that it was of high significance, but I wasn’t quite sure what it meant. What is meant by “any information regarding Julian Assange and Seth Rich?” Reports generated within the NSA that mention both? Communications in which either mentions the other? Direct communications between the two? What was the actual language of Clevenger’s request?

The final sentence of the blogpost seems to muddy the waters even more:


Eighth, the NSA has confirmed that it has Top Secret and Secret documents responsive to a FOIA request for information concerning contact between Seth Rich and other people including Julian Assange.

“And other people”?

Although I was somewhat confused by the meaning of this revelation, I commented on its significance. At the very least, it meant that the view that Seth was the source of the Wikileaks DNC releases was more than the brainless and callous conspiracy theory that mainstream media were making it out to be.
oldcynic, SkyCat  likes this!
Reply Share
(04-20-2019, 08:22 PM)Wingsprint Wrote: Bill Binney States that the NSA Has 32 Pages of Communications Between Seth Rich and Julian Assange, As Revealed by a FOIA Request

https://governmentslaves.news/2019/04/20...a-request/

About six months ago, a blogpost by “Publius Tacitus” appeared regarding attorney Ty Clevenger’s FOIA request regarding Seth Rich:


“But now there is new information that may corroborate what the human sources quoted in the Fox article claimed about Seth’s role in getting the DNC documents to Wikileaks. Borne from a FOIA request filed in November 2017 by attorney Ty Clevenger, who requested any information regarding Seth Rich and Julian Assange. The NSA informed Clevenger in a letter dated 4 October 2018 that:


Your request has been processed under the provisions of the FOIA. Fifteen documents (32 pages) responsive to your request have been reviewed by this Agency as required by the FOIA and have found to be currently and properly classified in accordance with Executive Order 13526. These documents meet the criteria for classification as set forth in Subparagraph © of Section 1.4 and remains classified TOP SECRET and SECRET.


If NSA had come back and said, “No, we do not have anything pertaining to Seth Rich,” that would have been news. It would have been especially unwelcome news for those who believe that Seth was the source on the DNC emails. But now the opposite is true. The NSA says that it has documents that are classified TS and S. What do those documents say or prove? That remains to be seen.”

At the time this appeared, I felt that it was of high significance, but I wasn’t quite sure what it meant. What is meant by “any information regarding Julian Assange and Seth Rich?” Reports generated within the NSA that mention both? Communications in which either mentions the other? Direct communications between the two? What was the actual language of Clevenger’s request?

The final sentence of the blogpost seems to muddy the waters even more:


Eighth, the NSA has confirmed that it has Top Secret and Secret documents responsive to a FOIA request for information concerning contact between Seth Rich and other people including Julian Assange.

“And other people”?

Although I was somewhat confused by the meaning of this revelation, I commented on its significance. At the very least, it meant that the view that Seth was the source of the Wikileaks DNC releases was more than the brainless and callous conspiracy theory that mainstream media were making it out to be.

Great find @Wingsprint !!! This cannot be swept under the carpet. Hey John Podesta!? BOOM! Smileyfud
"My Mind, a Field of Battles, Struggles for Peace in a Tight Place."
MysticPizza, SkyCat, Wingsprint  likes this!
Reply Share