[Stardust]

Chelsea Manning’s lawyer refutes conspiracy allegation against Julian Assange:

Whistleblower Chelsea Manning’s lawyer Nancy Hollander this week unequivocally rebutted accusations that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange enticed or collaborated with Manning to obtain the thousands of secret documents that WikiLeaks published in 2010, revealing the war crimes and other abuses committed by the US and its allies around the world.

Read more:

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/0 ... a-j25.html

[Stardust]

[Stardust]

US federal court exposes Democratic Party conspiracy against Assange and WikiLeaks

In a ruling published late Tuesday, Judge John Koeltl of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York delivered a devastating blow to the US-led conspiracy against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

In his ruling, Judge Koeltl, a Bill Clinton nominee and former assistant special prosecutor for the Watergate Special Prosecution Force, dismissed “with prejudice” a civil lawsuit filed in April 2018 by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) alleging WikiLeaks was civilly liable for conspiring with the Russian government to steal DNC emails and data and leak them to the public...

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/0 ... a-j31.html

[skinster]

[Stardust]

An insightful article published by Fidel Narvaez, former Ecuadorian Consul and friend of Julian Assange debunking the latest CNN smears:

CNN did not learn the lesson from the Manafort hoax 40 Rebuttals to CNN’s Bias on Assange

Having worked as a diplomat at the Ecuadorian embassy in London for six out of the seven years that Julian Assange lived there as a political refugee, unlike others, I am privy to what actually happened there. I am alarmed by CNN’s June 15th 2019 story, alleging Assange turned the Ecuadorian embassy in London into a command post for election meddling.

The story contains several substantive shortcomings and too many factual errors. I warned CNN about them when I was approached during their "investigation," but none of my points were included in the article. It is clear that CNN was not looking for balance in their publication, choosing instead to make assertions without showing actual proof, and to use props such as irrelevant CCTV images, a sensationalist collage and a miniature image of unreadable documents to make it seem as though the story was based on evidence...

[skinster]

More Pilger.

[Stardust]

Julian Assange’s father warns WikiLeaks’ publisher’s health is “declining rapidly” in Belmarsh Prison

In an interview on August 16 with 3CR, a Melbourne community radio station, Julian Assange’s father John Shipton stated that the WikiLeaks founder’s health is continuing to deteriorate in Britain’s maximum-security Belmarsh Prison.

Shipton revealed that Assange had received a visit from his brother Gabriel several days earlier. “Julian is emaciated and not in tip-top order or health,” Shipton said. “He is suffering anxiety. He is still in fighting spirits, but his well-being is declining rapidly.”

[skinster]

Pilger on Assange in this interview:

[Patrickov]

https://twitter.com/GrayzoneProject/status/1163928950990618624

Pilger on Assange in this interview:

We are in a war situation yes, but I am afraid Assange is on the wrong side. He finds out the evilness possessed by the West, but the problem is the enemies of the West are often more evil.

[skinster]

Wikileak's leaks are not limited to the West.

[Patrickov]

Wikileak's leaks are not limited to the West.

True, but the problem is Western people are more powerful against their governments than others. That means while the Western governments have to bear humiliations and criticisms, the more manipulative countries (like China), can simply brand it as "Look, even the West do things like this!", and divert the attention without much repurcussions. At the end, it's the tyrannical regimes that benefitted. That's why I said Assange (and of course, Edward Snowden) is on the wrong side. Note that this is different from the statement "they chose the wrong side", which I admit I don't have enough evidence to come to.

[JohnRawls]

True, but the problem is Western people are more powerful against their governments than others. That means while the Western governments have to bear humiliations and criticisms, the more manipulative countries (like China), can simply brand it as "Look, even the West do things like this!", and divert the attention without much repurcussions. At the end, it's the tyrannical regimes that benefitted. That's why I said Assange (and of course, Edward Snowden) is on the wrong side.

Snowden and Assange are not on the wrong side. What they do is perhaps harmful to the governments but they do a very important job for the people. They provide transparency that the governments don't want us to have. Or atleast in the areas that we are not supposed to have although at the same time we are supposed to be the thing that gives the government power. We can't be both the power holders and be extremely limited in our knowledge. It doesn't work that way.

[Patrickov]

Snowden and Assange are not on the wrong side. What they do is perhaps harmful to the governments but they do a very important job for the people. They provide transparency that the governments don't want us to have. Or atleast in the areas that we are not supposed to have although at the same time we are supposed to be the thing that gives the government power. We can't be both the power holders and be extremely limited in our knowledge. It doesn't work that way.

What I said is: What you said here only worked in the West. Their work, in reality, only enabled the enemies of the West to fool their people, or even some in the West who don't know better.

[skinster]

You are obviously clueless about the countries Wikileaks have leaked on outside of the West. Look it up, all the files are available online, they include China, Russia and wherever else you hate. Just because you haven't come across them, doesn't mean they don't exist.

[JohnRawls]

What I said is: What you said here only worked in the West. Their work, in reality, only enabled the enemies of the West to fool their people, or even some in the West who don't know better.

I get it 100%. The problem is what they do is more important to us compared to what blowback might happen and benefit China. That is the least of our concerns. If China wishes to use it in some PR way, sure it is their prerogative. To prevent this, we shouldn't have arrested and prosecuted Assange and Snowden in the first place. Then again, it is not something the government probably could have left unchecked. Snowdens case is pretty black and white for the government but Assange is a clear abuse of power and should be let go. (In a legal sense)

Okay, as a citizen I would prefer Snowden and Assange to not be prosecuted. They are doing the right thing. This is a case when the individuals are righteous as you say and the government prosecuting them.

[Patrickov]

You are obviously clueless about the countries Wikileaks have leaked on outside of the West. Look it up, all the files are available online, they include China, Russia and wherever else you hate. Just because you haven't come across them, doesn't mean they don't exist.

I made sure my first word of my message ("True") to acknowledge WikiLeaks did target the likes of Russia and China, yet you posted as if I made claims to the contrary. What you said is undoubtly a lie, and I now demand your apology.

[skinster]

And second, you go to Wikileaks website and learn some things.

[KS mod edit: Rule 2]

[Patrickov]

I get it 100%. The problem is what they do is more important to us compared to what blowback might happen and benefit China. That is the least of our concerns. If China wishes to use it in some PR way, sure it is their prerogative. To prevent this, we shouldn't have arrested and prosecuted Assange and Snowden in the first place. Then again, it is not something the government probably could have left unchecked. Snowdens case is pretty black and white for the government but Assange is a clear abuse of power and should be let go. (In a legal sense)

Okay, as a citizen I would prefer Snowden and Assange to not be prosecuted. They are doing the right thing. This is a case when the individuals are righteous as you say and the government prosecuting them.

What I referred is indeed the effect of their work before they were prosecuted, not about the prosecutions themselves. In fact, it is this very effect I mentioned that necessitate their prosecution, although whether it is necessary to take their lives or defame them is debatable.

For Assange's case, Sweden's use of rape as excuse is disappointing, as low as the level of CCP. The United States is at least being honest by proposing espionage charges, which are claims closer to what actually happened, and contains something that I somewhat agree with. If the court finds him not guilty so be it, but I still think his action isn't as positive as you or skinster claim.

[JohnRawls]

What I referred is indeed the effect of their work before they were prosecuted, not about the prosecutions themselves. In fact, it is this very effect I mentioned that necessitate their prosecution, although whether it is necessary to take their lives or defame them is debatable.

For Assange's case, Sweden's use of rape as excuse is disappointing, as low as the level of CCP. The United States is at least being honest by proposing espionage charges, which are claims closer to what actually happened, and contains something that I somewhat agree with. If the court finds him not guilty so be it, but I still think his action isn't as positive as you or skinster claim.

It is not their actions. They weren't the ones setting up the surveilance programs and running them. Snowden was a cog in a great machine. Assange is a publisher basically. Setting up those programs was paranoia after 9/11, a modern day solution to the terrorist problem. This solution stepped outside the boundaries though.

When the CCP does it, it basically doesn't do it to fight terrorism. It is there to monitor and control information: censorship and such. US programs were designed to monitor but not censor. That is a crucial difference. Everybody understand that difference, at least in the West. The problem for us is that this monitoring problem is not something that our governments are supposed to do in secrecy. Perhaps with our approval its tolerable. Also there is a question of what if they want to expand it to censor things out.

If they had done it publicly, the story might have been different. But they didn't, so Snowden and Assange had full right to do what they did.

It all comes back to the fact that if you are a democratic society then people are the holders of power. We have a right to know what is going on. And then we have the right to decide if we accept it or we tell you to shut it down.

[skinster]

The United States is at least being honest by proposing espionage charges, which are claims closer to what actually happened, and contains something that I somewhat agree with. If the court finds him not guilty so be it, but I still think his action isn't as positive as you or skinster claim.

There was no espionage. Wikileaks documents were leaked, by whistleblowers. Assange and his team didn't steal them or whatever.