By Vijay Prashad

OnSeptember 7, 2020, Julian Assange will leave his cell in Belmarsh Prison in London and attend a hearing that will determine his fate. After a long period of isolation, he was finally able to meet his partnerStella Morisand see their two sonsGabriel (age three) and Max (age one)on August 25. After the visit, Morissaidthat he looked to be in a lot of pain.

The hearing that Assange will face has nothing to do with the reasons for his arrest from the embassy of Ecuador in London on April 11, 2019. He was arrested that day for hisfailureto surrender in 2012 to the British authorities, who would have extradited him to Sweden; in Sweden, at that time, there were accusations of sexual offenses against Assange that weredroppedin November 2019. Indeed, after the Swedish authorities decided not to pursue Assange, he should have been released by the UK government. But he was not.

The true reason for the arrest was never the charge in Sweden; it was the desire of the U.S. government to have him brought to the United States on a range of charges. On April 11, 2019, the UK Home Office spokespersonsaid, We can confirm that Julian Assange was arrested in relation to a provisional extradition request from the United States of America. He is accused in the United States of America of computer-related offenses.

Manning

The day after Assanges arrest, the campaign group Article 19 published astatementthat said that while the UK authorities had originally said they wanted to arrest Assange for fleeing bail in 2012 toward the Swedish extradition request, it had now become clear that the arrest was due to a U.S. Justice Departmentclaimon him. The U.S. wanted Assange on a federal charge of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to break a password to a classified U.S. government computer. Assange was accused of helping whistleblowerChelsea Manningin 2010 when Manning passed WikiLeaksled by Assangean explosive trove of classified information from the U.S. government that contained clear evidence of war crimes. Manning spent seven years in prison before her sentence wascommutedby former U.S. President Barack Obama.

While Assange was in the Ecuadorian embassy and now as he languishes in Belmarsh Prison, the U.S. government has attempted to create an air-tight case against him. The U.S. Justice DepartmentindictedAssange on at least 18 charges, including the publication of classified documents and a charge that he helped Manning crack a password and hack into a computer at the Pentagon. One of theindictmentsfrom 2018makes the case against Assange clearly.

The charge that Assange published the documents is not the central one, since the documents were also published by a range of media outlets such as the New York Times and the Guardian. The keychargeis that Assange actively encouraged Manning to provide more information and agreed to crack a password hash stored on U.S. Department of Defense computers connected to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRNet), a United States government network used for classified documents and communications. Assange is also charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to crack that password hash. The problem here is that it appears that the U.S. government has no evidence that Assange colluded with Manning to break into the U.S. system.

Manning does not deny that she broke into the system, downloaded the materials, and sent them to WikiLeaks. Once she had done this, WikiLeaks, like the other media outlets, published the materials. Manning had a very trying seven years in prison for her role in the transmission of the materials. Because of the lack of evidence against Assange, Manning was asked to testify against him before a grand jury. She refused and now is once more inprison; the U.S. authorities are using her imprisonment as a way to compel her to testify against Assange.

What Manning Sent to Assange

On January 8, 2010, WikiLeaksannouncedthat it had encrypted videos of U.S. bomb strikes on civilians. The video, later released as Collateral Murder, showed in cold-blooded detail how on July 12, 2007, U.S. AH-64 Apache helicopters fired 30-millimeter guns at a group of Iraqis in New Baghdad; among those killed were Reuters photographer Namir Noor-Eldeen and his driver Saeed Chmagh. Reuters immediately asked for information about the killing; they were fed the official story and told that there was no video, but Reuters futilelypersisted.

In 2009, Washington Post reporter David Finkel publishedThe Good Soldiers, based on his time embedded with the 2-16 battalion of the U.S. military. Finkel was with the U.S. soldiers in the Al-Amin neighborhood when they heard the Apache helicopters firing. For his book, Finkel had watched the tape (this is evident frompages 96 to 104); he defends the U.S. military, saying that the Apache crew had followed the rules of engagement and that everyone had acted appropriately. The soldiers, he wrote, were good soldiers, and the time had come for dinner. Finkel had made it clear that a video existed, even though the U.S. government denied its existence to Reuters.

Thevideois horrifying. It shows the callousness of the pilots. The people on the ground were not shooting at anyone. The pilots fire indiscriminately. Look at those dead bastards, one of them says, while another says, Nice, after they fire at the civilians. A van pulls up at the carnage, and a person gets out to help the injuredincluding Saeed Chmagh. The pilots request permission to fire at the van, get permission rapidly, and shoot at the van. Army Specialist Ethan McCordpart of the 2-16 battalion that had Finkel embedded with themsurveyed the scene from the ground minutes later. In 2010, McCordtoldWireds Kim Zetter what he saw: I have never seen anybody being shot by a 30-millimeter round before. It didnt seem real, in the sense that it didnt look like human beings. They were destroyed.

In the van, McCord and other soldiers found badly injured Sajad Mutashar (age 10) and Doaha Mutashar (age five); their father, Salehwho had tried to rescue Saeed Chmaghwas dead on the ground. In the video, the pilot saw that there were children in the van; Well, its their fault for bringing their kids into a battle, he says callously.

Robert Gibbs, the press secretary for President Barack Obama,saidin April 2010 that the events on the video were extremely tragic. But the cat was out of the bag. This video showed the world the actual character of the U.S. war on Iraq, which the United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan hadcalledillegal. The release of the video by Assange and WikiLeaks embarrassed the United States government. All its claims of humanitarian warfare had no credibility.

The campaign to destroy Assange begins at that point. The United States government has made it clear that it wants to try Assange for everything up totreason. People who reveal the dark side of U.S. power, such as Assange andEdward Snowden, are given no quarter. There is a long list of peoplesuch as Manning,Jeffrey Sterling,James Hitselberger,John Kiriakou, andReality Winnerwho, if they lived in countries being targeted by the United States, would be called dissidents. Manning is a hero for exposing war crimes; Assange, who merely assisted her, is being persecuted in plain daylight.

On January 28, 2007, a few months before he was killed by the U.S. military, Namir Noor-Eldeen took aphotographin Baghdad of a young boy with a soccer ball under his arm steps around a pool of blood. Beside the bright red blood lie a few rumpled schoolbooks. It was Noor-Eldeens humane eye that went for that photograph, with the boy walking around the danger as if it were nothing more than garbage on the sidewalk. This is what the U.S. illegal war had done to his country.

All these years later, that war remains alive and well in a courtroom in London; there Julian Assangewho revealed the truth of the killingwill struggle against being one more casualty of the U.S. war on Iraq.

This article was produced by Globetrotter, a project of the Independent Media Institute.

Vijay Prashad is an Indian historian, editor and journalist. He is a writing fellow and chief correspondent at Globetrotter, a project of the Independent Media Institute. He is the chief editor of LeftWord Books and the director of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research. He is a senior non-resident fellow at Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, Renmin University of China. He has written more than 20 books, including The Darker Nations and The Poorer Nations. His latest book is Washington Bullets, with an introduction by Evo Morales Ayma.

Read the original here:

The US Is Determined to Make Julian Assange Pay for Exposing the Cruelty of Its War on Iraq - PRESSENZA International News Agency

A new documentary by Juan Passarelli can be seen here on Consortium News, followed by a panel discussion with Passarelli, director Ken Loach and filmmaker Suzie Gilbert. Journalists are under attack globally for doing their jobs. Julian Assange is facing a 175 year sentence for publishing if extradited to the United States. The Trump administration has gone from denigrating journalists as enemies of the people to now criminalizing common practices in journalism that have long served the public interest.

Imprisoned WikiLeaks founder and editor Assanges extradition is being sought by the Trump administration, in a hearing to begin Sept. 7, for publishing U.S. government documents, which exposed war crimes and human rights abuses. He is being held in maximum security HMP Belmarsh in London. There is a war on journalism and Julian Assange is at the centre of that war. If this precedent is set then what happens to Assange can happen to any journalist. Join director Ken Loach and film-maker Suzie Gilbert for a discussion with Juan Passarelli about his new documentary The War on Journalism: The Case of Julian Assange.

Watch the replay here:

Read the original post:

WATCH: The War on Journalism: The Case of Julian Assange - Consortium News

Following a tip from the FBI, Facebook Inc. today said that its removed Pages and accounts linked to Russias infamous troll farm, the Internet Research Agency.

In areport, Facebook said it removed 13 Facebook accounts and two Pages that violated its policy against foreign interference through coordinated inauthentic behavior. The activity originated in Russia, with the focus mainly being on the U.S., the U.K., Algeria, Egypt and other English-speaking countries and countries in the Middle East and North Africa.

The content came from fake accounts using fictitious personas designed to move traffic to a phony news organization. The accounts used fake profile pictures to hoodwink people into thinking they were genuine editors, but more worrying, U.S.-based freelance journalists were duped into writing stories.

People recruited were said to be on the left of the political spectrum, with some of the content that was posted related to social and racial justice in the U.S. Facebook said other stories centered on President Donald Trump, the Biden-Harris campaign, Julian Assange, QAnon, alleged Western war crimes, the coronavirus pandemic, migrants (n the U.K.), corruption, U.S. military policies, among other divisive topics.

Around 14,000 accounts followed one of more of the two Pages and $480 was spent of ads, paid for mostly in U.S. dollars. Its reported that the Russian agency is again trying to help elect Trump by dividing Democratic voters on such issues.

One of the pages went under the name Peace Data, which described itself as an international news organization. The same outfit has also just had accounts suspended on Twitter and LinkedIn. On Facebook alone, it posted 500 stories in English and a further 200 stories in Arabic between February and August this year.

These actors get caught between a rock and a hard place, Nathaniel Gleicher, Facebooks cybersecurity boss, said in a press conference. They can run a large noisy network that gets caught quickly, or they can work very hard to hide themselves, still get caught, and not get a lot of attention.

Show your support for our mission with our one-click subscription to our YouTube channel (below). The more subscribers we have, the more YouTube will suggest relevant enterprise and emerging technology content to you. Thanks!

Support our mission: >>>>>> SUBSCRIBE NOW >>>>>> to our YouTube channel.

Wed also like to tell you about our mission and how you can help us fulfill it. SiliconANGLE Media Inc.s business model is based on the intrinsic value of the content, not advertising. Unlike many online publications, we dont have a paywall or run banner advertising, because we want to keep our journalism open, without influence or the need to chase traffic.The journalism, reporting and commentary onSiliconANGLE along with live, unscripted video from our Silicon Valley studio and globe-trotting video teams attheCUBE take a lot of hard work, time and money. Keeping the quality high requires the support of sponsors who are aligned with our vision of ad-free journalism content.

If you like the reporting, video interviews and other ad-free content here,please take a moment to check out a sample of the video content supported by our sponsors,tweet your support, and keep coming back toSiliconANGLE.

More:

Russian troll farm enlisted US journalist to write about divisive issues - SiliconANGLE

BuzzFeed News; Getty Images

The federal government has once again released hundreds of pages of previously unseen records from former special counsel Robert Muellers two-year investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and President Donald Trumps attempts to obstruct the inquiry.

These documents, interview summaries known within the FBI as 302s, were turned over to BuzzFeed News and CNN in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. They reveal what hundreds of people many of them close to Trump and his campaign told federal investigators when they were questioned as part of the probe, which began in May 2017.

Since last November, more than 3,000 pages of the interview summaries, excerpts of which are sprinkled throughout Muellers final report, have been released to the public. However, many details were never cited in the report. For example, Paul Manafort was still actively advising the Trump campaign three days before Election Day in 2016 despite having been fired as campaign manager nearly three months earlier. That fact, wrote Trumps next campaign manager, Steve Bannon, in an email, needed to be kept secret or they are going to try to say the Russians worked with wiki leaks to give this victory to us.

The latest cache includes additional interview summaries from Manafort and his fellow associate Rick Gates, and former spokesperson for the Office of Director of National Intelligence, Timothy Barrett, who now works as a spokesperson for CIA. The identities of dozens of other witnesses were redacted on privacy grounds.

At 4:51 p.m. on May 9, 2017, an hour before Trump fired James Comey, the White House was getting impatient. It asked the FBI for Comeys email address. Given the option of classified or unclassified, the reply was, it doesnt matter, just give us his email address. Four minutes later, according to the version of events provided by the FBI agent to Muellers team, the bureaus command center was notified that White House aide and longtime Trump associate Keith Schiller was at the FBI headquarters building with a letter for Comey. FBI staff scrambled to find someone to receive it. At around 5:38 pm, a person whose name was redacted met with Schiller and accepted the letter, which was delivered to Comeys office two minutes later.

Comey was not in Washington at the time; he learned about it from a news bulletin while meeting with FBI agents in Los Angeles. Still, the agent told Muellers office that one of the FBI staff involved its not clear who, given the many redactions commented that whoever conveyed the letter may have just handled history.

Paul Manafort spoke to Muellers office at length about his old business partner, Roger Stone. Manafort described in detail how the two were in touch when Manafort ran Trumps campaign in the spring and summer of 2016 but Stone was no longer an official part of the operation. Manafort made clear that he believed Stone had some line of communication to WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange, albeit an indirect one.

On June 12, 2016, Assange announced that WikiLeaks planned to release a cache of Hillary Clintons emails. Manafort said he told Trump that Stone had predicted it correctly, and Trump asked if Stone knew what was in them; Manafort said no.

Manafort said he told Stone to stay on top of what WikiLeaks was doing, but did not mention that the request came from Trump, because he didnt want to be an errand boy.

Manafort said Stone claimed to have no control over the October 2016 release of Clinton campaign chair John Podestas hacked emails, but said he may have had advance knowledge.

Manafort was confused as to the various people and hacks, according to the interview summary, and at one point asked Stone to walk him through it all.

A person whose name was redacted on privacy grounds was interviewed over the phone by the FBI on October 10, 2017. A portion of the interview was redacted. But the person told the FBI that in their opinion, "Russian President Vladimir Putin has 'bit off more than he can chew' in his government's efforts to interfere in the U.S. election."

"The Russian administration sought to throw a wrench into the U.S. political process for what it perceived was a slight by the Obama administration in which Russia was not taken seriously," the interview summary says.

In another interview, an individual involved in fundraising for Trump whose name was redacted, told investigators in December 2017 that the campaign seemed totally unprepared to raise money or ensure that it complied with federal election laws. The campaign, which the person called unorthodox, had no donor lists and was not actively raising money as late as May 2016, when he became the Republican partys presumptive nominee for president. The only activity was the campaign merchandise store, the FBI memorandum said.

Following a fundraiser hosted by Tom Barrack, the private equity baron and close ally of Trump, money began pouring in. But little attention seemed to be paid internally to ensuring that federal election rules were followed, including verifying whether non-US citizens might be contributing. The witness was asked but was not sure of what controls the campaign had in place for foreign, excessive, or other ineligible contributions, the FBI 302 said.

The newest entry in the interview summaries is Timothy Barrett, the former spokesperson for the Office of Director of National Intelligence who now works for CIA in the same capacity. Barrett was interviewed by FBI agents in the Washington field office on November 29, 2017. His connection to the Mueller probe has not been previously reported.

He discussed with agents a phone call he received from Saoud Mekhennet, a German journalist he knew who has contributed to The Washington Post and The New York Times and who wrote a book about the Islamic State. Apparently Mekhennet had queried Barrett about something Russia-related and she was seeking confirmation "as well as guidance on if there were reasons she should not publish the story."

The details of what she was reporting are redacted because they relate to an ongoing law enforcement investigation. Thats notable because most of the investigations that came out of Muellers inquiry have ended by now. Barrett was unavailable for comment Tuesday evening.

Although the Mueller investigation ultimately led to 37 indictments and seven convictions, Trump has aggressively sought to discredit it since the time it was launched, repeatedly referring to it as a witch hunt. Those efforts have been supported by Attorney General Bill Barr, who has intervened in several cases related to the investigation, including the prosecutions of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and political consultant Roger Stone.

The final 448-page Mueller report, released in April 2019, reflected only a tiny fraction of the information gathered by Muellers team of federal prosecutors and FBI and IRS agents amassed over the course of the two-year probe. Much of the contents of the typewritten summaries taken for each and every interview has never before been reviewed publicly. A month after the report was released, BuzzFeed News sued the FBI and the Department of Justice, seeking access to those records. That litigation was subsequently joined by CNN.

The majority of the 302s have been heavily redacted, leaving vast swaths of information about what witnesses told investigators obscured from view. BuzzFeed News has challenged some of those redactions, arguing in court that one category of exemption the government has cited to justify the withholdings was legally unfounded, politically motivated, and implemented solely to protect the president.

Read the original post:

Updated: New FBI Documents Show What Witnesses In The Mueller Probe Told Federal Investigators About Trump And Russia - BuzzFeed News

By Oscar Grenfell 28 August 2020

Julian Assange received his first visitors in six months, less than a fortnight out from British court hearings for the extradition of the persecuted WikiLeaks publisher to the US, where he faces life imprisonment for exposing American war crimes.

Stella Morris, Assanges partner and an internationally-respected human rights attorney, was allowed to meet with the WikiLeaks founder earlier this week, after authorities at Londons Belmarsh Prison eased restrictions introduced in response to the coronavirus pandemic. It was the first time that Morris and their two young children Gabriel and Max had seen Assange since March 22.

The visit is welcome news for all supporters of Assange and democratic rights. But it has underscored the brutal conditions in which he is held by the British authorities, despite not having been convicted of any crime, and has sparked renewed fears that his health is continuing to deteriorate.

In comments to the PA news agency after the visit, Morris said that the experience had been incredibly stressful but that she was relieved to have been able to see Assange.

We had to keep social distancing and Julian was told he would have to self-isolate for two weeks if he touched the children, Morris said. Julian said it was the first time he had been given a mask because things are very different behind the doors.

She added: At least he got to see the children, even though he couldnt touch them. The children were both calm. We all remained seated the whole time.

Morris said that the older of the boys, Gabriel, who is three-years old, showed off his abilities to count and to recite the alphabet. Gabriel was born when Assange was a political refugee in Ecuadors London embassy, where his arbitrary detention was enforced by British threats to arrest him if he set foot outside the building.

The infant child was immediately targeted for intrusive surveillance and other human rights violations by the US Central Intelligence Agency. Max, who is one-year-old, first met Assange in 2019 at Belmarsh, a facility dubbed Britains Guantnamo Bay.

Speaking of Assanges physical condition, Morris said: He is in a lot of pain. She stated that he continues to suffer from a frozen shoulder, a long-term condition compounded by a lack of adequate medical treatment. He had also recently sprained his ankle.

I could not see him very clearly because of the visors, but he looked a lot thinner. He was wearing a yellow armband to indicate his level of prisoner status, and you could see how thin his arms were, Morris explained.

The confirmation that Assange has not been provided with a mask is evidence that the British state wants him dead. That the most high-profile political prisoner in the world, detained in a country falsely held up as a beacon of democracy, was not provided with the most basic protection during an unprecedented global pandemic sums up the criminality of the decade-long persecution of Assange.

At the height of the crisis, hundreds of prison staff and inmates at penitentiaries across the country were struck down by the virus, including in Belmarsh. Warnings from medical experts that Assange was particularly susceptible to succumbing to COVID-19, given his chronic respiratory issues, were ignored and an application for bail contemptuously dismissed.

The calls for Assanges release on medical grounds during the pandemic followed statements of concern by doctors from around the world since November last year that Assange could die in Belmarsh due to a lack of adequate treatment.

United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer has repeatedly condemned Assanges imprisonment as a continuation of government abuses that have resulted in the WikiLeaks founder displaying the medically-verifiable symptoms of psychological torture.

The latest indications of Assanges physical condition follow reports that he looked poorly when he attended his last court hearing by video link on August 14. Assange was reportedly coughing through much of his brief appearance and appeared to be unwell.

As the WSWS wrote in a perspective article, the August 14 hearing made clear, if any further proof was needed, that the prosecution of Julian Assange is a shameful and degrading show trial, intended to railroad an innocent man to prison or death for revealing the crimes of US imperialism.

In a blatant violation of legal procedures and due process, the US filed a superseding indictment of Assange days before the hearing, and more than a year after the deadline elapsed for them to present a final charge sheet. This is a transparent attempt to prevent Assanges legal team from presenting any defence.

The new indictment contains no new information or charges. It is the tortured product of American intelligence agents and two of their informants, including one previously convicted of impersonating Assange and stealing money from WikiLeaks.

The gross abuse has not been condemned by any of the official political parties in Britain, the US or Australia. By their silence, all of them, including Labor and the Greens in Australia and the British Labour Party, have given their blessing to the show trial that Assange is set to be subjected to when extradition hearings recommence on September 7.

The unprecedented persecution of the WikiLeaks publisher has also been treated as a non-event by the corporate media, which enjoy the closest ties with the military and intelligence agencies that have spearheaded the pursuit of Assange.

The substantial public support that Assange enjoys, which stands in marked contrast to the stance of the political and media establishments, has been expressed in the response to an online fundraiser for his legal expenses, initiated last week by Morris.

The initial target of 25,000 was achieved within days. A stretch goal of 50,000 has since been surpassed and the appeal is well on its way to the new target of 75,000. As of this writing, almost 68,000 has been contributed by 1,563 people from around the world.

Morris provided an update on Wednesday, writing: Julian wanted me to thank you personally for all of the help you have provided in covering his legal fees to fight the extradition to the USA, where he faces 175 years in prison.

Read more:
Julian Assange receives first visitors in six months: He is in a lot of pain - WSWS

Australia is widely perceived as a liberal democratic and also egalitarian country. Yet erosions of democracy in the antipodes are occurring in an incremental yet rapid manner. As Elisabeth sbrink notes in Made in Sweden, a reputation for social democracy can obscure the undermining of democratic norms.

Australiahas a federal and parliamentary system of government, and the two major political parties are Liberal and Labor respectively. In the Australian context, the Liberal Party is broadly regarded as conservative and centre-right and the Labor Party as progressive and centre-left. With its coalition partner the National Party which represents a largely rural constituency the Liberal Party was returned to federal office in 2019 on a slim policy platform which openly appealed to fears of what a radical Labor government might entail.

A clear move to the political right now challenges the conventional reading of the Australian Liberal Party as centrist. Critics observe that the Coalition hand victories directly to the far right whenever it is expedient to do so. In a stark assessment, Jason Wilson says the fact that, unlike Trumps administration, the Coalition is generally regarded as a normal, mainstream conservative government, should be no comfort [and] should be a reminder of how far things can go under the guise of normalcy.

In response to the coronavirus, the Federal Coalition has implemented a massive stimulus package to now unemployed workers, which is supported across party and ideological lines. As recently as a few months ago, such a measure would have been unthinkable by any government claiming conservative credentials. The advent of COVID-19 has signalled a degree of bipartisanship on the management of public health in Australia.

But the emergence of COVID-19 also deflects attention from rising authoritarianism across a number of areas. The pandemic has also increased the anti-democratic incursions of right-wing politics which were already visible.

The following authoritarian measures, policies, and events constitute only some of those which could be cited. Their cumulative impact under cover of coronavirus risks receiving insufficient attention in terms of the challenges posed to the health of Australian democracy:

Prominent cases include those of Witness K (a former intelligence officer who disclosed the bugging by the Australian government of the government of Timor-Leste for the purpose of trade treaty advantage), Richard Boyle (a former debt collection officer who exposed recovery tactics by the Australian Taxation Office), and David McBride (a lawyer whose provision to the national broadcaster of documents regarding the conduct of Australian special forces in Afghanistan led to raids on the ABC by the Australian Federal Police).

In an extraordinary and unprecedented step, the lawyer of Witness K, former ACT Attorney General Bernard Collaery is also being prosecuted: In all three cases, the whistleblowers went through the appropriate steps to raise their concerns internally within government, before frustration at inaction led them into going public.

The Commonwealth has intervened to require closed trials in key whistleblower cases. National security, as Chomsky has long argued, is often invoked to conceal abuses of government power. This costly exercise of government intrusion, through which members of the legal profession including a former judge have spoken out, has caused controversy in a string of cases in recent years.

Described by the President of the Law Council of Australia as a highly extraordinary and unusual measure, the proposed bill is likely to take effect on or before 7 September 2020. This is a timeframe which impedes parliamentary scrutiny of measures wide-ranging in their impact.

Recent media raids by the Australian Federal Police (one of which was subsequently ruled to be unlawful) has led to concern that investigative journalism is being put in [the] same category as criminality. In combination with stringent budget cuts to the ABC which have occurred consistently under Liberal Federal Governments, these raids further erode the capacity of the public broadcaster to report on topics and events of national significance as a robust democracy requires.

Despite the high stakes in so many regards, the silence of the Australian government in relation to the untenable situation of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange continues. Increasing intolerance of whistleblowers and longstanding bipartisan belief that the security alliance with the United States is sacrosanct explains but does not excuse this shameful response regarding the literally tortuous treatment of Assange who is an Australian citizen. For the federal government Coalition of the land down under and notwithstanding the chilling implications for press freedom worldwide there is literally nothing to see.

The (mis)treatment of asylum-seekers, already draconian in the pre-COVID period, has reached calamitous proportions during the pandemic. Concerns over national security are used to deny humane policy to asylum seekers. This is even at a time of pandemic in which public health issues challenge conventional notions of what security entails.

The Minister for Home Affairs, Peter Dutton (a minister that heads a vastly expanded portfolio intersecting the Australian Security and Intelligence) may be guilty of contempt of court due to failure to administer the Migration Act in accordance with law [and to] have deliberately decided to administer that legislation in a manner contrary to law. The presiding judge in this case has said that the stance of the Minister makes a mockery of any concept of the Minister acting as a model litigant.

Federal government encouragement of Australians to download a surveillance app for the purpose of reducing transmission of COVID-19 is one of many instances of such encroachment. The rationale for this particular measure is obvious. But as Australian Human Rights Commissioner Edward Santow notes in the context of policing, such technologies can unfairly disadvantage people based on attributes like their race or gender.

Both targeting of vulnerable groups and misapplication of technology are apparent in the `Robodebt debacle. `Robodebt an automated debt repayment system which generated debt notifications to vast numbers of Australians dependent on welfare support damaged and destroyed many lives. Not only has it been found to be unlawful, but the Federal government was apparently aware of its illegality well in advance of this court determination. So egregious is the catalogue of concerns regarding the Robodebt fiasco that there are calls for a Royal Commission to address them.

The need for a national integrity commission with sufficient `teeth to investigate ministerial and politician misconduct has been called for by many over a long period. An independent Tasmanian senator has accused both major political parties of attempting a snow job which would result in limited inquiry into key potential areas of corruption.

Currently disclosure of financial contributions to political parties at the federal level does not occur until months after the elections they influence (and in the case of the 2019 Federal election significantly sway). Government attempts to retain weak federal laws on political donations are opposed by many, including the Australian Greens and independent crossbench politicians.

Federal government refusal to release conflict-of-interest statements of the COVID-19 Coordination Commission is especially concerning in that this body is headed by the former chief of Fortescue Metals. Gas development is also being promoted by the Commission as a means of increasing economic growth into the future. The continuing absence of a Federal government policy on climate change, and the disproportionate influence of a subgroup within the Coalition which continues to support the coal industry and opposes reduced dependence on fossil fuels, is a source of ongoing dismay to many.

Lack of openness by the ruling Federal Coalition is also apparent in many other regards, often and again on the ground of national security.

Intensification of movement towards right-wing authoritarianism under the current Federal Liberal-National Coalition is also apparent in contrasting government responses to freedom of expression. Articulation of right-wing views is regarded as unproblematic while left-wing perspectives are decidedly unwelcome.

The religious discrimination bill proposed by the Federal government is another instance in which ostensibly neutral upholding of the right to freedom of expression can enable active discrimination in this case in the name of faith against those whose beliefs, behaviours and life-styles may not accord with what is considered acceptable by dominant groups.

The several points above describe authoritarian incursions into contemporary Australian life. These profoundly anti-democratic incursions advance the goals of the political right.

In the current period of COVID-19, escalating global tension, collapsing economies and increased surveillance, they are also particularly insidious. This is because under cover of both public health and national security, such incursions can rapidly proliferate.

Similarly to European and other countries, Australia faces the undermining of democratic processes and institutions. Hence, the Democracy in Europe Movement (DIEM25) and its recently founded Progressive International with the Sanders Institute in its emphasis on genuine egalitarianism and internationalist solidarity is a forum by which the rise of neoliberal authoritarianism can be contested in Europe and the world.

Pictured: Whistleblower Bernard Collaery. Photo Source: MEFAFN.

Do you want to be informed of DiEM25's actions? Sign up here

See the original post here:
Authoritarianism in Australia: right-wing politics in the antipodes - DiEM25

One of Trumpisms enduring scars will be the social fissures its widened by waging war on objective reality and public faith in bedrock institutions. Its also fostered a cult of personality around Donald Trump, allowing him to posture as the final arbiter of truth and guardian of the downtrodden. But division, chaos and disrepair and the corruption of the American experiment are the long-term consequences.

So its encouraging when a bipartisan group of federal legislators reminds us that facts matter.

A 966-page Senate report published Tuesday leaves no doubt that an extensive network of Russian operatives with intelligence ties worked with Trumps operatives to torpedo Hillary Clintons campaign four years ago. Russian President Vladimir Putin oversaw the effort, including a successful hack of Democratic Party computer systems. Why? To smear Clinton and hobble her administration if she won, and to gain leverage with Trump if he won.

The Republican-led committee that produced the report said that Trumps former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, was so steeped in the effort with Russia that he posed a grave counterintelligence threat. It said that Donald Trump Jr., the presidents son, participated in a covert effort by the Russian government to help his father in 2016. It said the president himself may have been a possible target of Russian blackmail. It said that Putin was aware that Trump during his presidential campaign was secretly pursuing a deal to build a skyscraper in Moscow.

The committee also found that Roger Stone, Trumps longtime political hatchet man, made elaborate efforts to learn about Russian leaks of confidential Democratic emails through Julian Assanges

hacking collective, WikiLeaks. And in the course of that discovery, the committee learned that Trump did, in fact, speak with Stone about WikiLeaks and with members of his campaign about Stones access to WikiLeaks on multiple occasions. Thats interesting, because the president himself, in written testimony to former Special Counsel Robert Mueller, said he couldnt recall those conversations.

Mueller concluded his work last year by saying he hadnt found enough evidence to charge Team Trump with a criminal conspiracy. He clearly found evidence that the Trump camp tried to obstruct justice, however, and he left it to Congress to hash out the matter. For its part, the Senate report said that the Trump campaigns intersection with Putins underlings didnt amount to a coordinated conspiracy and that in some cases the sheer dimwittedness of the people working for Trump exposed them to manipulation.

You may remember that Trump and his GOP backers tried to spin Muellers findings by saying that no collusion meant that Trump and those around him did nothing wrong. Republicans on Tuesday resurrected the no collusion mantra, working hard to convey the idea that the Senate report somehow meant that everythings all right, everythings fine, and we want you to sleep well tonight.

But, of course, everything isnt all right. The Russia scandal wasnt a hoax. It was reality.

Even if the skullduggery the Senate documented didnt amount to a formal conspiracy, sabotage and malfeasance took place. Russia got its hooks into a presidential election, Trump used his campaign to try to make business deals in Moscow, the people around Trump invited foreign influence into an election, and the president apparently lied to Mueller. Its not a mystery why Trump has cultivated and coddled Putin throughout his presidency, even if the Senate didnt chart the money trail all the way to Russia. The president, who spent his business career consorting with mobsters, has always had an affinity with grifters and those, like Putin, who he thinks might help him grift.

Trumps supporters have worked overtime focusing on tangential aspects of the Russia scandal to keep Trumps presidency in play, confirm their own biases or soften any guilt they might feel for looking the other way in the face of overt corruption. Right-wing media and Republican apologists have argued that a minor piece of evidence used by federal investigators an unreliable dossier about Trumps Russia ties prepared by a former British intelligence agent, Christopher Steele meant that the entire Russian probe was improper.

As I noted at greater length last year, the Steele dossier wasnt the reason the Russia probe began, and its shortcomings simply werent pivotal enough to demonstrate that the probe was ill-considered. The Senate report points out that the Federal Bureau of Investigation mishandled the Steele dossier and gave it too much credence. More important, however, the report doesnt dismiss the far greater weight of all the other evidence of Trumps corrosive and dangerous game of patty-cake with Russia.

Russias threats to American elections and national security are ongoing, and thats another reason the Senate report is valuable. Because facts are fundamental, and its impossible to make good decisions without them. Mother Nature has reminded us of this truth with the coronavirus pandemic. The Senates report teaches the same lesson in its assessment of Russia, the Trump administration and White House propaganda.

Timothy L. OBrien is a senior columnist for Bloomberg Opinion.

Here is the original post:

The Senate report on Trump and Russia is a triumph for truth - Frederick News Post

comment,

MY appreciation to the Newcastle Herald, and congratulations to Dr Kelvin Kong (pictured) on the wonderful, inspiring account of Dr Kong's stand as a proud and noble Worimi man ('Skin in the game', Herald 18/8). Dr Kong treats every person he meets as a dignified fellow human being and extends to everyone his warmth and empathy, particularly those in his care as his patients in his position as a superb and highly skilled surgeon. On 28 February 2014 Dr Kong was the surgeon who skillfully operated on me to remove my nose, which had become compromised by an invasive squamous cell carcinoma due to overexposure to the dangerous ultraviolet radiation from sunlight. It was a traumatic time for me, but made far easier by Dr Kong's ever-cheerful manner and excellent skills as a surgeon. On knowing of the necessity for the surgery, Dr Kong operated within days of the knowledge that the operation was urgent, reassuring me that all would be well. In the immediate years following the procedure he performed an annual and detailed inspection of the site to monitor my recovery. Above all, Dr Kong carries the torch for humanity and tolerance amongst all those he meets. He shines by example. He is not just a skilled surgeon but an ambassador for humanity. That's his message for all of us. PICTURES of hotel quarantine security guards asleep in the corridors gave me the inference that this was a major cause of the Victorian outbreak. I think it's understandable as the job would not be particularly engaging. Why not source people that are being forced to work from home, set them up with a desk and free wifi, perhaps even free food, in the corridor to keep an eye on movements? Engagement in their work, which hopefully would keep them awake, and be there on the very odd occasion somebody tried to bend the rules. You probably wouldn't have to pay them any extra either. SPEED limits have been reduced to 30km/h along Honeysuckle Drive, Wharf Road and Shortland Esplanade ('Foreshore roads go 30km/h', Herald 18/8). This, along with the autonomous vehicle which locals call "the very slow no driver, no passenger bus to nowhere" will certainly slow traffic down. But what about the hoons that parade up and down Wharf Road, particularly on Saturday and Sunday afternoons with their souped-up cars, and get delight in showing off to others with the sounds of their bugle like, fire cracking exhausts? It would be great if the traffic police patrolled this area on these days with both radar and decibel counters in order to try and control these hoons. Let's hope the reduction in speed limits work, but unfortunately this is only half of the problem. I was very interested to read about the Newcastle Herald having evidence or material highlighting the safety issues in the construction sector in our city ('No safety in numbers', Herald 24/6). Please put it out there for all to see. We must keep our industry above board. Our industry has far too many accidents and unfortunately some deaths. With all of the unit developments and other major projects underway, every site has a program to meet. It's all good at the start of a project but towards the end I believe safety is the first thing to disappear on site. Work safely and do a wonderful job. With the majority of builders in Newcastle being not from Newcastle, in my opinion we see a disdain towards Newcastle based subcontractors. Out of town construction companies employ subcontractors from other areas, mainly Sydney. Lately I have been aware of operators from the Sunshine Coast, Brisbane, Taree, Port Macquarie. How can this be possible? My understanding is that many of these subcontractors truck their materials from Sydney, leaving local suppliers out of the loop. By bringing in their own people they can be keeping local tradesmen scratching for survival. How buoyant would our town be if all materials and most of the labour was sourced from Newcastle? Alas, this is nowhere near the case. These is just some of the injustices happening in this industry. LOCK The Gate spokesperson Georgina Woods has every right to be concerned about the rehabilitation of BHP's Mt Arthur coal mine ('Big retreat', Herald 19/8) if the Herald's report on September 1 2012 of the hand-over a decade earlier of the former BHP steelworks site to the state government is a reliable guide. The Herald reported: "An environmental deed that BHP Billiton and the state government refused to release under freedom of information shows taxpayers will pay the costs of any problems at the Newcastle steelworks site once BHP's initial payment of $100 million is gone" The mistake BHP made in 2002 was to think its handover of the steelworks container terminal site to the public wouldn't come back to haunt them. The Labor state government took ownership of the site to block development of a container terminal. IN London, Julian Assange is fighting to avoid being sent to the US to face 17 charges under the Espionage Act after the publication of thousands of classified US documents in 2010 and 2011. Campaigners are arguing Assange's extradition must be prevented as it would endanger the global freedom of the press. In England this month, 169 lawyers and legal organisations petitioned the UK government to intervene. In July in England, dozens of organisations representing human rights and freedom of the press signed an open letter to the government calling for Assange's release from prison. He is serving a 50-week sentence for a breach of bail - 50 weeks. In June, more than 200 doctors from 33 countries signed a letter published in The Lancet, accusing UK and American officials of "intensifying Julian Assange's psychological torture". Assange's extradition hearing, originally set for May, was deferred because of the coronavirus lockdown and won't be heard at the Old Bailey until September. MESSAGE to ORICA: To alleviate the problems of stockpile with chemical compounds ('Could it happen here?', Herald 5/8) would it not be appropriate to make a stockpile in the bottom of a disused pit hole? If it then explodes it can only deepen the big hole even further. Maybe it will uncover more riches at the bottom of the abyss left by the big mining companies. NO-ONE likes a beer more than I do, but how can council justify allowing a microbrewery opposite Lingard Hospital ('Pet crematorium rejected', Newcastle Herald 19/8)? In my opinion parking alone should rule it out. During the day, it is virtually impossible to find a park now, so how this will play out for residents, existing businesses, and visitors to the hospital is beyond comprehension. Another awful decision by our council. I AM just wondering what the many climate catastrophists who write to this page think when they see Warragamba Dam spilling over. It's the ridiculous predictions by the likes of Professor Tim Flannery who in 2007 said that our dams would never be full again, that leads to people distrusting the alarmist science. MILTON Caine's letter (Letters, 15/8) listing his concerns for dangerous material safety storage can be, in my opinion, shortened to a list of one; human error. DAVID Stuart (Short Takes, 17/8) thinks Gladys Berejiklian has been acting on the advice of the best medical people available in this state. Is this why she and her medical advisers have received the strong condemnation from the Ruby Princess Commission of Inquiry regarding their inaction and for which she has acknowledged blame by way of that lame apology she tendered to those who were "hurt" by the virus? THIS year marks 150 years since the passing of Maria Ann Smith. She came from Surrey, England to Australia where she developed the beautiful green apple that has her name; Granny Smith. She is buried in Sydney. REGARDING John Ure's piece on special religious classes (Letters 18/8), these classes are about saving people's soul that they may have everlasting life. That is a good investment. I put a proposal to a university. I would pay the university to do an experiment that would prove mediums do get correct information via inspired thought. The offer was turned down, even though the university had nothing to lose. So there are ways of demonstrating that there is more to life than the eye can see, and that religion has truth to it. WHERE was Scott Hillard's faux concern for those vulnerable individuals deeply affected by the Morrison government's disgraceful robodebt fiasco (Letters, 15/8)? Nowhere to be seen. GLEN Wilson (Short Takes, 18/8), the answer to your question is yes. I believe we are forced into this ridiculous situation with people losing everything for no real apparent reason. Shark attacks are nearly more common than a coronavirus death, that's how ridiculous it is in my opinion. Open the joint up, protect the elderly and let the chips fall where they fall.

https://nnimgt-a.akamaihd.net/transform/v1/crop/frm/silverstone-feed-data/4f2e3f0f-9d11-4c1c-964e-c4cfbdb07582.jpg/r2_0_726_409_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg

HAVE YOUR SAY

August 20 2020 - 7:00AM

MY appreciation to the Newcastle Herald, and congratulations to Dr Kelvin Kong (pictured) on the wonderful, inspiring account of Dr Kong's stand as a proud and noble Worimi man ('Skin in the game', Herald 18/8). Dr Kong treats every person he meets as a dignified fellow human being and extends to everyone his warmth and empathy, particularly those in his care as his patients in his position as a superb and highly skilled surgeon.

On 28 February 2014 Dr Kong was the surgeon who skillfully operated on me to remove my nose, which had become compromised by an invasive squamous cell carcinoma due to overexposure to the dangerous ultraviolet radiation from sunlight.

It was a traumatic time for me, but made far easier by Dr Kong's ever-cheerful manner and excellent skills as a surgeon. On knowing of the necessity for the surgery, Dr Kong operated within days of the knowledge that the operation was urgent, reassuring me that all would be well. In the immediate years following the procedure he performed an annual and detailed inspection of the site to monitor my recovery.

Above all, Dr Kong carries the torch for humanity and tolerance amongst all those he meets. He shines by example. He is not just a skilled surgeon but an ambassador for humanity. That's his message for all of us.

Kevin McDonald, East Seaham

Extra tasks to add moreinterest

PICTURES of hotel quarantine security guards asleep in the corridors gave me the inference that this was a major cause of the Victorian outbreak. I think it's understandable as the job would not be particularly engaging. Why not source people that are being forced to work from home, set them up with a desk and free wifi, perhaps even free food, in the corridor to keep an eye on movements?

Engagement in their work, which hopefully would keep them awake, and be there on the very odd occasion somebody tried to bend the rules. You probably wouldn't have to pay them any extra either.

James Wilson, Wangi Wangi

Cars in city's east far from super

SPEED limits have been reduced to 30km/h along Honeysuckle Drive, Wharf Road and Shortland Esplanade ('Foreshore roads go 30km/h', Herald 18/8).

This, along with the autonomous vehicle which locals call "the very slow no driver, no passenger bus to nowhere" will certainly slow traffic down. But what about the hoons that parade up and down Wharf Road, particularly on Saturday and Sunday afternoons with their souped-up cars, and get delight in showing off to others with the sounds of their bugle like, fire cracking exhausts?

It would be great if the traffic police patrolled this area on these days with both radar and decibel counters in order to try and control these hoons. Let's hope the reduction in speed limits work, but unfortunately this is only half of the problem.

John Fear, Newcastle East

Build up the local traders

I was very interested to read about the Newcastle Herald having evidence or material highlighting the safety issues in the construction sector in our city ('No safety in numbers', Herald 24/6).

Please put it out there for all to see. We must keep our industry above board. Our industry has far too many accidents and unfortunately some deaths. With all of the unit developments and other major projects underway, every site has a program to meet. It's all good at the start of a project but towards the end I believe safety is the first thing to disappear on site. Work safely and do a wonderful job.

With the majority of builders in Newcastle being not from Newcastle, in my opinion we see a disdain towards Newcastle based subcontractors. Out of town construction companies employ subcontractors from other areas, mainly Sydney. Lately I have been aware of operators from the Sunshine Coast, Brisbane, Taree, Port Macquarie. How can this be possible?

My understanding is that many of these subcontractors truck their materials from Sydney, leaving local suppliers out of the loop. By bringing in their own people they can be keeping local tradesmen scratching for survival. How buoyant would our town be if all materials and most of the labour was sourced from Newcastle? Alas, this is nowhere near the case. These is just some of the injustices happening in this industry.

Mark Anderson, Cardiff South

Site solutions must outlast sales

LOCK The Gate spokesperson Georgina Woods has every right to be concerned about the rehabilitation of BHP's Mt Arthur coal mine ('Big retreat', Herald 19/8) if the Herald's report on September 1 2012 of the hand-over a decade earlier of the former BHP steelworks site to the state government is a reliable guide.

The Herald reported: "An environmental deed that BHP Billiton and the state government refused to release under freedom of information shows taxpayers will pay the costs of any problems at the Newcastle steelworks site once BHP's initial payment of $100 million is gone"

The mistake BHP made in 2002 was to think its handover of the steelworks container terminal site to the public wouldn't come back to haunt them. The Labor state government took ownership of the site to block development of a container terminal.

Assange's fight is far from over

IN London, Julian Assange is fighting to avoid being sent to the US to face 17 charges under the Espionage Act after the publication of thousands of classified US documents in 2010 and 2011. Campaigners are arguing Assange's extradition must be prevented as it would endanger the global freedom of the press.

In England this month, 169 lawyers and legal organisations petitioned the UK government to intervene. In July in England, dozens of organisations representing human rights and freedom of the press signed an open letter to the government calling for Assange's release from prison. He is serving a 50-week sentence for a breach of bail - 50 weeks. In June, more than 200 doctors from 33 countries signed a letter published in The Lancet, accusing UK and American officials of "intensifying Julian Assange's psychological torture". Assange's extradition hearing, originally set for May, was deferred because of the coronavirus lockdown and won't be heard at the Old Bailey until September.

Going deep on blasted stockpiles

MESSAGE to ORICA: To alleviate the problems of stockpile with chemical compounds ('Could it happen here?', Herald 5/8) would it not be appropriate to make a stockpile in the bottom of a disused pit hole? If it then explodes it can only deepen the big hole even further. Maybe it will uncover more riches at the bottom of the abyss left by the big mining companies.

John Bradford, Beresfield

Email letters@newcastleherald.com.au or send a text message to 0427 154 176 (include name, suburb). Letters should be fewer than 200 words and Short Takes fewer than 50 words. Correspondence may be edited and reproduced in any form.

NO-ONE likes a beer more than I do, but how can council justify allowing a microbrewery opposite Lingard Hospital ('Pet crematorium rejected', NewcastleHerald 19/8)? In my opinion parking alone should rule it out. During the day, it is virtually impossible to find a park now, so how this will play out for residents, existing businesses, and visitors to the hospital is beyond comprehension. Another awful decision by our council.

Derek Thompson, Newcastle West

I AM just wondering what the many climate catastrophists who write to this page think when they see Warragamba Dam spilling over. It's the ridiculous predictions by the likes of Professor Tim Flannery who in 2007 said that our dams would never be full again, that leads to people distrusting the alarmist science.

Greg Hunt, Newcastle West

MILTON Caine's letter (Letters, 15/8) listing his concerns for dangerous material safety storage can be, in my opinion, shortened to a list of one; human error.

Bryn Roberts, New Lambton

DAVID Stuart (Short Takes, 17/8) thinks Gladys Berejiklian has been acting on the advice of the best medical people available in this state. Is this why she and her medical advisers have received the strong condemnation from the Ruby Princess Commission of Inquiry regarding their inaction and for which she has acknowledged blame by way of that lame apology she tendered to those who were "hurt" by the virus?

THIS year marks 150 years since the passing of Maria Ann Smith. She came from Surrey, England to Australia where she developed the beautiful green apple that has her name; Granny Smith. She is buried in Sydney.

Neville Briggs, East Branxton

REGARDING John Ure's piece on special religious classes (Letters 18/8), these classes are about saving people's soul that they may have everlasting life. That is a good investment. I put a proposal to a university. I would pay the university to do an experiment that would prove mediums do get correct information via inspired thought. The offer was turned down, even though the university had nothing to lose. So there are ways of demonstrating that there is more to life than the eye can see, and that religion has truth to it.

WHERE was Scott Hillard's faux concern for those vulnerable individuals deeply affected by the Morrison government's disgraceful robodebt fiasco (Letters, 15/8)? Nowhere to be seen.

GLEN Wilson (Short Takes, 18/8), the answer to your question is yes. I believe we are forced into this ridiculous situation with people losing everything for no real apparent reason. Shark attacks are nearly more common than a coronavirus death, that's how ridiculous it is in my opinion. Open the joint up, protect the elderly and let the chips fall where they fall.

More here:

Letters to the editor and short takes Thursday August 20 2020 - Newcastle Herald

The unjust persecution of Julian Assange (and the knock-on effects the media will feel) should be the point were discussing not your personal opinion of him.

Whenever you voice concerns aboutthe persecution of Julian Assangeon any public forum, you will be met by those calling Assange a stinky Nazi rapist Putin puppet Trump supporter who deserves to be in prison forever.

Whats striking about these responses, which by now are as familiar to me as the keyboard I type these words on, is how extremely emotional they always are. If you talk about economic policy or foreign policy, for example, you might get a few angry troglodytes who take internet arguments far too seriously, but youll also typically get people calmly explaining why they believe youre wrong and laying out ostensibly fact-based arguments for why this is so.

This is literally never the case with people who want to see Assange imprisoned, in my extensive experience. Theres never, ever any calm, fact-based rationale for why the benefits of prosecuting and imprisoning him for his publications outweigh the risks and costs of doing so. Its always vitriolic, hyperbolic, frequently profanity-riddled arguments from pure emotion, usually something to the effect of He collaborated with Russia/helped Trump win the election, therefore and I want him punished because I hate him. Which is just another way of saying, I want Assange imprisoned because of the way my feelings feel.

The completely baseless claim that Assange is not a journalist is used in an attempt to defuse the argument that his prosecution by the US government could lead to the same fate for any news media outlet which publishes leaks on the US government anywhere in the world. If hes not a journalist, then his prosecution sets no precedent for real journalists.

This argument, if you can call it that, is fallacious for a number of reasons. For starters, asThe Intercepts Glenn Greenwaldexplained, theres not any legal distinction in the US Constitution between news media outlets like theNew York Times and an outlet which solely focuses on publishing leaks. If you set the precedent with any publisher, youre necessarily setting it for all of them. Greenwald writes the following: To begin with, the press freedom guarantee of the First Amendment isnt confined to legitimate news outletswhatever that might mean. The First Amendment isnt available only to a certain class of people licensed as journalists. It protects not a privileged group of people called professional journalists but rather an activity: namely, using the press (which at the time of the First Amendments enactment meant the literal printing press) to inform the public about what the government was doing. Everyone is entitled to that constitutional protection equally: there is no cogent way to justify why the Guardian, ex-DOJ-officials-turned-bloggers, or Marcy Wheeler are free to publish classified information but Julian Assange and WikiLeaks are not.

Now, aside from theestablished factthat the US governments agenda to prosecute Assange has nothing to do with the 2016 election but with the exposure of US war crimes six years earlier, this is also a completely fallacious argument from top to bottom. Claiming that something ought to happen because of how your feelings feel is very obviouslya logical fallacy, but this kind of argument comprises the entirety of support for Assanges imprisonment that Assange defenders encounter on a regular basis.

I believe this happens becausethe smear campaignthat has been used by the western political/media class to manufacture support for Assanges silencing and imprisonment has its foundation not in fact, but in emotion. Smear campaigns are by their nature emotional at their core, because they are intended to elicit public disgust, disdain and hatred for their target. Thats why youll see so many mainstream news media articlesclaiming that Assange smells bad, for example, despite that having nothing whatsoever to do with the legitimacy or illegitimacy of Assanges work. The goal is not to present a factual case for why it would be more helpful than harmful to prosecute the WikiLeaks founder, the goal is to make people feel disgust for him, and, by extension, disgust for his work as well.

Another reason the Assange smears focus on emotion rather than facts is that the facts are very contrary to the interests of the smear merchants. The facts are that prosecuting Julian Assange under the Espionage Act for exposing US war crimes, as the Trump administration is attempting to do, would strike a devastating blow to press freedoms around the world. This is because there are no legal distinctions in place separating an outlet like WikiLeaks from outlets like theNew York Times, theWashington Post, or theGuardian, meaning that a precedent would be set allowing for the prosecution of those outlets on the same grounds, who also publish anonymous government leaks. Which is why theNew York Times, theWashington PostandtheGuardianhave all warned sternly of this precedent, which has also beenrecognised by the Obama administration.

We all need the ability to hold power to account, and the prosecution of Assange will necessarily cripple our ability to do that. This is a fact. Regardless of how your feelings feel.

Read more from the original source:
The persecution of Assange matters...your opinion of him does not - The Big Smoke Australia

154 lawyers and legal academics worldwide and hundreds more represented by their professional associations have written to UK government heads to request that extradition proceedings against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange end immediately. The letter is addressed to prime minister Boris Johnson, the lord chancellor and secretary of state for justice Robert Buckland QC, the secretary of state for foreign affairs Dominic Raab, and home secretary Priti Patel.

One of the lawyers who signed the letter is Australian barrister Greg Barns (featured in main image alongside Assange).

The letter begins:

We write to you as legal practitioners and legal academics to express our collective concerns about the violations of Mr Julian Assanges fundamental human, civil and political rights and the precedent his persecution is setting.

We call on you to act in accordance with national and international law, human rights and the rule of law by bringing an end to the ongoing extradition proceedings and granting Mr Assange his long overdue freedom freedom from torture, arbitrary detention and deprivation of liberty, and political persecution

The signatories argue that the extradition of Assange would be illegal for several reasons:

Regarding the first point, the signatories point out that the surveillance conducted on Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy was unlawful:

Mr Assanges legal privilege, a right enshrined in Art. 8 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and long recognised under English common law, was grossly violated through constant and criminal video and audio surveillance at the Ecuadorian embassy carried out by the Spanish security firm, UC Global. This surveillance was, according to witness testimony, ordered by the CIA.

The Council of Bar and Law Societies of Europe, which represents more than a million European lawyers, has expressed its concerns that these illegal recordings may be used openly or secretly in proceedings against Mr Assange in the event of successful extradition to the US. The Council states that if the information merely became known to the prosecutors, this would present an irremediable breach of Mr Assanges fundamental rights to a fair trial under Art. 6 of the ECHR and due process under the US Constitution. Furthermore, the prosecuting state obtained the totality of Mr Assanges legal papers after their unlawful seizure in the Embassy.

Regarding the second point, the signatories observe that Charges 1-17 [raised against Assange] are brought under the Espionage Act 1917, which, in name alone, reveals the political and antiquated nature of the charges. The letter adds: The UK-US Extradition Treaty, which provides the very basis of the extradition request, specifically prohibits extradition for political offences in Art. 4(1).

Also:

there is broad international consensus that political offences should not be the basis of extradition.[ix] This is reflected in Art. 3 of the 1957 European Convention on Extradition, Art. 3 ECHR, Art. 3(a) of the UN Model Treaty on Extradition, the Interpol Constitution and every bilateral treaty ratified by the US for over a century.

Regarding the third point and what awaits Assange in the US, the letter notes:

Under the principle of non-refoulement, it is not permissible to extradite a person to a country in which there are substantial grounds for believing that they would be subjected to torture. This principle is enshrined in the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, specifically Art. 33(1) from which no derogations are permitted. Also relevant are Art. 3(1) UN Declaration on Territorial Asylum 1967, Art. 3 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), and Art. 2 of the Resolution on Asylum to Persons in Danger of Persecution, adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe in 1967. As an obligation arising from the prohibition of torture, the principle of non-refoulement in this area is absolute and also takes on the character of a peremptory norm of customary international law, i.e. jus cogens.

The letter also points out that the US prosecution of Assange would be a violation of the freedom of the press and the right to know:

Counts 1-17 of the indictment under the Espionage Act violate the right to freedom of expression, the right to freedom of the press and the right to know. These counts present standard and necessary investigative journalistic practices as criminal.[xvi] Such practices include indicating availability to receive information, indicating what information is of interest, encouraging the provision of information, receipt of information for the purpose of publication, and publication of information in the public interest.

Under the charge of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion, the initial indictment criminalised also Mr Assanges alleged attempt at helping his source to maintain their anonymity while providing the documents in question, which falls squarely under the standard journalistic practice and duty of protecting the source.

The letter adds that Extradition on the basis of the indictment would gravely endanger freedom of the press, a cornerstone of European democracies enshrined in Art. 10 ECHR.

There are other implications:

The extradition to the US of a publisher and journalist, for engaging in journalistic activities while in Europe, would set a very dangerous precedent for the extra-territorialisation of state secrecy laws and would post an invitation to other states to follow suit, severely threatening the ability of journalists, publishers and human rights organisations to safely reveal information about serious international issues.

The letter further argues that the treatment of Assange and the conditions under which he is imprisoned amounts to torture. It notes:

Although Mr Assange has now served the sentence [for skipping bail], he remains imprisoned without conviction or legal basis for the purpose of a political, and thereby illegal, extradition to the US

The signatories add:

We would like to remind the UK government:

The letter refers to more violations and in particular conflicts of interest. In this respect, the letter points out that:

Senior District Judge (Magistrates Courts) Emma Arbuthnot, who as Chief Magistrate oversees Mr Assanges extradition proceedings, has been shown to have financial links to institutions and individuals whose wrongdoings have been exposed by WikiLeaks, the organisation which Mr Assange founded.[xxxviii] This seemingly clear conflict of interest was, however, not disclosed by the District Judge. District Judge Arbuthnot did not recuse herself and was permitted to make rulings to Mr Assanges detriment, despite the perceived lack of judicial impartiality and independence.

The letter indicates further violations, such as denial of adequate resources to Assange to help in his defence.

The letters signatories number 154 individuals and 15 professional associations which in turn represent hundreds more practitioners of law.

The letter ends: we respectfully request that the UK government bring an end to the US extradition proceedings against Mr Assange and ensure his immediate release from custody. Indeed, the extradition proceedings against Assange are not only arguably a violation of his legal rights, but arguably a violation of legal procedure.

Assange should be freed now and the extradition farce halted.

Featured image supplied

See the original post here:
Assange extradition proceedings are illegal and should end, 100s of lawyers tell government - The Canary