WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said that an intelligence contractor arrested for allegedly leaking NSA documents to a news website must be supported.

Reality Leigh Winner, 25, was charged with criminal offenses Monday, after allegedly leaking the secret documents to a news outlet.

Alleged NSA whistleblower Reality Leigh Winner must be supported, tweeted Assange Monday alongside a picture of Winner. She is a young woman accused of courage in trying to help us know.

Subscribe to Newsweek from $1 per week

Court documents filed Monday by the government did not outline which media organization the documents were leaked to, but a senior federal official told NBC that Winner is the alleged leaker of documents published by The Intercept, which described Russian attempts to hack U.S. voting systems before the 2017 presidential election.

The site reported that the documents show Russia may have breached elements of the voting system, with disconcertingly uncertain results."

The complaint alleges that Winner admitted printing out the secret documents and mailing them to a media outlet.

During the campaign WikiLeaks published documents allegedly stolen by state-sponsored Russian hackers from the Democrat Partys email servers, in what U.S. intelligence agencies have alleged was part of a deliberate Russian attempt to discredit presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

The new documents seem to have been leaked in a bid to expose the extent of Russias attempts to subvert the election, but Assange still backed Winner.

It doesnt matter why she did it or the quality [of] the report, Assange added in a separate tweet. Acts of non-elite sources communicating knowledge should be strongly encouraged.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange makes a speech from the balcony of the Ecuadorian Embassy, in central London, Britain February 5, 2016. Reuters

WikiLeaks published secret U.S. documents leaked by former U.S. soldier Chelsea Manning in 2010, including thousands of diplomatic cables and military reports on U.S. operations in the MIddle East.

For several years Assange has taken asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, claiming that rape allegations made against him in Sweden are politically motivated, and that if he traveled to the country for questioning, he could be extradited to the U.S. where he would face charges for publishing the Manning documents.

Sweden announced it was dropping its investigation into the rape allegations in May, but Assange remains in the embassy, with a Metropolitan Police warrant for his arrest still active.

More:
Julian Assange: NSA Leaks Suspect Reality Leigh Winner 'Must Be Supported' - Newsweek

After a very long period of mollycoddling, the Trump administration appears to finally be getting tough with Wikileaks. During a press conference in April, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said that he was looking for ways to arrest and prosecuteits mercurial leader, Julian Assange. That same month, CIA Director Mike Pompeodenounced the organization as a hostile intelligence service, but added that the problem of Wikileaks and Assange offered no quick fix.

With all due respect to the estimable CIA Director, I would proffer there is a quick fix.

We can drone Julian Assange.

In a controlled targeted strike, the United States canblow up the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he currently resides, and put an end to Mr. Assange and Wikileaks.

Now hear me out; I dont use the D-word lightly. The fact is, Mr. Assange is no ordinary hacker, fleecing little old ladies or snatching R&D from Microsoft. He is a nefarious actor on the world stage. His disclosures have directly aided and abetted Americas international adversaries from Russia to ISIS, and his leaks have unquestionably made Americans and many others less safe around the world. Assanges actions are not hacking, they are cyberterrorism and they should be dealt with thusly.

Assange should be given an ultimatum, say 48 hours, to surrender to British authorities, or face a drone strike.

If you accept the premise that drone attacks are appropriate in some situations where it is impossible to apprehend suspected terrorists, then a proposed drone attack against Assange seems permissible,Robert Precht, a former public defendertold Mediaite. Giving the option of surrendering or being attacked actually seems generous.

Its a subject on which Precht is uniquely qualified to opine. In 1993 he served as the defense attorney for World Trade Center bomber Mohammad Salameh, which he later recounted in his book,Defending Mohammad.

Having defended the lead suspect in the World Trade Center bombing case, I would say the evidence of conspiring to commit terrorist acts is greater in Assanges case than the evidence against some of the World Trade Center defendants, who are all serving life sentences now, he told Mediaite.

It takes only a cursory look at Assanges record to see how Precht came to his conclusion.

Back in 2010, Wikileaks released a cable listing numerous sensitive sites around the world. As the New York Times reported at the time, the listing was a potential goldmine for terrorists looking to launch attacks against U.S. interests andpersonnel. Then-British Foreign Secretary William Hague called the leak particularly reprehensible, adding to BBC Radio that, there is great concern, of course, about disclosing a list of targets that could be of use to terrorists or saboteurs.

Just a year later, another document dump from Wikileaks released the names of thousands of individuals whose inclusion in secret U.S. cables stood to put them in immense personal danger. Many of them were activists and fellow whistleblowers like Assange himself. Publishing the files without the redactions served no public interest.

We deplore the decision of WikiLeaks to publish the unredacted state department cables, which may put sources at risk, read a joint statement issued by Assanges then-media partners,The New York Times, El Pais, Le Monde, Der Spiegel and the Guardian which reported the news.

Per the Guardian:

Diplomats, governments, human rights charities and media organizations had urged WikiLeakss founder, Assange, not to publish the full cache of cables without careful source protection WikiLeaks has published its full archive in an easily accessible and searchable manner, the first time the content has been made widely available to those without sophisticated technical skills.

It wasnt a one-off either. Wikileaks has continued its practice of recklessly releasingunredacted names, with a fresh example in just March of this year.

To me, the fact that he released documents identifying vulnerable targets of terrorism is damning, said Precht.

The amazing thing about droning Julian Assange is that, once oneaccepts the premise that he is drone-worthy, the elegance and humanity of that option becomes readily apparent.

The British, which the BBC estimates have spent 12,000,000 on Assange related security costs, would likely be happy enough for any solution that gets rid of him. And since there is no risk of Assange escaping, negotiations between the U.S. and Ecuador could take place with full transparency with zero risk for miscommunication.

If a credible threat of drone strike were calmly issued to the Ecuadorians, they would almost certainly eject Assange, negating the need for it in the first place. On the odd chance they refused, a date for droning could be set and publicly announced, giving Embassy staff ample time to evacuate themselves from the area. Londons finest, meanwhile, could ensure the zone was completely cordoned off from civilians.

At the risk of being trite it would be like droning fish in a barrel.

As former president George W. Bush once said, the United States should make no distinction between terrorists and those harbor them. Ecuador is harboring a terrorist, and the United States should send a message that, that is still not okay.

[image via screengrab]

Follow Jon Levine onTwitter/Facebook.

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.

Read more here:
The Case For Droning Julian Assange | Mediaite - Mediaite

Julian Assange tweeted that several US networks had suggested he start broadcasting from the embassy. Photograph: Jack Taylor/Getty Images

Julian Assange has indicated he may guest host a US radio show from the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

The WikiLeaks founder said he was looking into filling in for Sean Hannity after the presenter offered him a one-off chance to host his conservative talkshow.

But Assange said the plan was complicated by his being inside the central London embassy, which he has not left for nearly five years. My physical circumstances means that nothing is easy, he told the US broadcaster CNN.

The opportunity arose after he tweeted that several US networks had suggested he start weekly broadcasts from within the embassy.

The Sean Hannity Show host replied: If you would like to fill in for me one day, I am on over 550 stations and 14-plus million listeners.

The Fox News presenter has not always been so fond of Assange, having accused him of waging war against the US by publishing a cache of leaked documents over which he may still face extradition if he leaves the embassy.

But his tone changed after Assange announced he would leak files that would later hinder the campaign of Hillary Clinton in last years presidential election.

The Australian remains in the embassy despite Swedish prosecutors dropping a seven-year investigation over an allegation of rape, which he denies, on 19 May. Scotland Yard has said that if he leaves the embassy it will execute an arrest warrant for his failure to surrender to court in 2012.

Go here to see the original:
Julian Assange considers offer to guest host Sean Hannity radio show - The Guardian

Paul Keating, Tony Abbott and Julia Gillard have all delivered some zingers in their time.

William Charles Wentworth is famed for crossing the Blue Mountains but was also a political pioneer.

WHAT makes a leader great? And has Australia ever had a truly great political leader?

Apparently we have had 10 -- including several you have probably never heard of.

A former top political advisor has compiled a definitive list of the greatest political figures in Australian history and it is nothing if not surprising.

John Adams has warned that hyperpartisanship and relentless attempts to seize power by the political class has sent Australia into a national decline.

In an effort to stop this descent, the one-time economics and policy advisor has released his list, which he says should be taught in schools and be the subject of a national debate.

He has measured each figure against six key criteria:

1. Personal Courage

2. Acted in the public/national interest

3. Leadership

4. Foresight

5. Consistency

6. Impact

Adams, a former advisor to political supremo Arthur Sinodinos, as well as a former management consultant for a major accounting firm and public servant within the Commonwealth and NSW public services, says we need to be reminded of a better class of political leader to rescue Australia from its current perilous state.

Unfortunately, a significant majority of the current political class are obsessed with obtaining and maintaining power. As a result, they are unwilling to lead and take significant political and personal risks, but rather pursue deeply ideological agendas which do not align with the pressing public policy concerns of the Australian people, he says.

Moreover, many contemporary politicians seek to politicise every possible issue under the sun and employ hyper-partisan divide and conquer tactics, with the objective of pitting one Australian against another, in the hope that Australians become frustrated with the opposing side.

Hopefully, this top 10 list can trigger a national debate about the state of national decline Australia currently finds herself in and the rotten political class which is responsible for placing Australia in the current perilous state.

The list will no doubt be controversial there are at least two notable omissions, possibly more the fault of history than of the author. And, coming from a former Coalition warrior, many of the names on it will be a major surprise as will several whom you probably have never heard of. There is also one major name that failed to make the grade.*

See if you can pick the three unusual absences my answers are below. In the meantime, here is John Adams list of

Australias Top 10 Greatest Political Figures of all Time

Australian Prime Minister Joseph Lyons tops the list.Source:Supplied

1. Joseph Lyons

Former Labor Premier of Tasmania and Cabinet Minister in the Scullin Government, Lyons quit Federal Cabinet in January 1931 and later in March quit the ALP over the federal caucus decision to reappoint Ted Theodore as Treasurer. Theodore advocated significant money supply and credit expansion by the Commonwealth Bank to finance the Australian Governments significant expenditure and debts during the credit crisis of the Great Depression.

Concerned by the collapse of confidence among Australias creditors in London that Australia would struggle to meet its debt obligations and reminded by Germanys 1923 experience with hyperinflation, Lyons advocated for sound money and for significant cuts in public spending and wages across the Australian economy.

Lyons went on to unite with conservative parliamentarians to become the Leader of the United Australia Party and the Leader of the Opposition. Lyons courage and principled resolve resulted in him being elected as Australias 10th Prime Minister, winning 3 elections in total until his death in office in 1939. Lyons economic policies during the Great Depression resulted in the Australia economy enjoying a faster economic recovery relative to the US economy which was the leading economy in the world.

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange after Sweden dropped a warrant that drove him to take refuge in Ecuador's London embassy. Picture: AFP/Justin TallisSource:AFP

2. Julian Assange

Founder of the Wikileaks which is an international organisation with a perfect 10.5 year publishing record of the secrets of Government and major corporations. Driven by the political philosophy that citizens have a right to be informed about the true nature of government and corporate activity, Wikileaks has revealed information which has allowed citizens around the world to make superior political judgements and decisions when participating in democratic elections.

Assanges courage and body of work has made him a global hero to millions around the world. He single-handedly changed the tide of the 2016 US election by exposing corrupt behaviour at the Democratic National Committee and by exposing significant contradictions between Hillary Clintons public and private policy positions.

Still controversial, Assanges body of work has resulted in him becoming an effective political prisoner in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he has remained for four years.

Opposition Leader Dr John Hewson puts on a brave face in the aftermath of the 1993 election.Source:News Corp Australia

3. John Hewson

Leader of the Opposition and of the federal Liberal Party between 1990 and 1993. John Hewson fought the 1993 election on his Fightback package, which was the boldest economic policy reform package ever to be launched by a parliamentary opposition in Australian political history. While losing the 1993 election, Hewsons courage to fight an election on significant tax and other economic reforms paved the way for the Howard Governments success in implementing tax reform after the 1998 election.

Peter Lalor, leader of the 1854 Eureka Stockade revolt.Source:News Limited

4. Peter Lalor

Leader of the Eureka Reform League and the Eureka Rebellion in 1854. The Eureka Reform League passed resolutions affirming the right of the people to full representation, manhood suffrage, the abolition of the property qualification for members, payment of members, short Parliaments, and the abolition of the Gold Commission and the diggers licenses.

Lalor was shot in the left arm during the raid on the Eureka Stockade on the morning of 3 December 1854 which required amputation. As a result of the actions Peter Lalor and the Eureka Reform League, the Electoral Act 1856 was passed by the Victorian Parliament which expanded the electoral franchise of Victorians and for the first time in the western world introduced the secret ballot as part of the electoral process which was soon adopted around the world and has become a global standard for free and fair elections.

Former NSW Independent MP John Hatton, whose work led to the police royal commission.Source:News Limited

5. John Hatton

NSW Parliament Independent member for the South Coast from 1977 to 1995. John Hatton campaigned tirelessly against police corruption and also worked courageously to expose mafia crime around Griffith. Hattons parliamentary body of work led to the formation of the Royal Commission into the NSW Police Service in 1994. The Royal Commission uncovered hundreds of instances of bribery, money laundering, drug trafficking, fabrication of evidence, destruction of evidence, fraud and serious assaults in just the detective division of the Kings Cross patrol.

The Royal Commission led to widespread reform of the NSW Police Force and the establishment of the NSW Police Integrity Commission.

Former NSW Governor George Gipps defied popular opinion to punish crimes against Indigenous Australians.Source:News Corp Australia

6. George Gipps

Governor of New South Wales between 1838 and 1846. During his tenure as Governor, Gipps was the first governor in Australian history to take aggressive unpopular action to punish white perpetrators of the mass murder of Indigenous Australians and to prevent further mass murders from occurring. Governor Gipps believed that Indigenous Australians were entitled to protection under the law.

Famously, in response to the Myall Massacre in which 28 Indigenous men, women and children were murdered and burnt (in some cases alive), Governor Gipps commissioned an investigation of the massacre, ordered a retrial after the first trial found the accused not guilty and then took on the powerful and well-funded interests as well as widespread outrage within Sydney by following through on the execution of seven men who were found guilty during the second trial.

Wartime leader John Curtin portrait by Anthony Dattilo Rubbo.Source:News Limited

7. John Curtin

As Australias 14th Prime Minister between 1941 to 1945, Curtin led Australia during the countrys darkest hours in World War 2. Having been a part of the British Empire since 1788, John Curtin displayed significant courage in confronting Winston Churchill after the significant defeat in Singapore at the hands of Japan.

Fearing that Australias national survival was hanging in the balance, John Curtin switched Australias military allegiances from the United Kingdom to the United States which resulted in Australias national survival, the establishment of the ANZUS treaty and a 70+ year military, intelligence and economic partnership which is still in place today.

Paul Keating in full flight during Question Time -- named in this top 10 by a former Coalition advisor.Source:Supplied

8. Paul Keating

Commonwealth Treasurer and 24th Prime Minister from 1983 to 1996. Paul Keating should significant leadership in driving major economic reform throughout the 1980s and 1990s, including the floating of the Australian dollar, bank deregulation, trade reform, the 1985 tax summit and subsequent reform package, privatisation reform, competition reform, establishment of the superannuation system, the establishment of the Council of Australian Governments and the 1993 industrial relations reform package which introduced generational reform.

Keating also showed enormous courage and leadership during the 1986 balance of payments crisis when he warned Australia risked become a banana republic if the country did not confront its economic challenges. As a result, Paul Keating cut commonwealth spending and went on to deliver 3 budget surpluses.

As Prime Minister, Paul Keating provided visionary leadership on Australias future inevitable relationship with Asia, played a key role in the establishment of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum (APEC) and on Indigenous reconciliation through his famous 1992 Redfern speech.

John Howard shortly before being elected in 1996, after which he became the nations second-longest serving PM.Source:News Corp Australia

9. John Howard

Australias 25th Prime Minister led a determined reformist government achieving major reform including waterfront reform, tax reform and industrial reform (including reform of the building construction sector). Howard was instrumental in working with his Treasurer, Peter Costello in delivering 11 out of 12 surplus budgets. At the risk of triggering a regional armed conflict, Howard committed Australian troops to defend the people of East Timor through a United Nations protection force in 1999.

Howard also showed tremendous courage and leadership by introducing the unpopular Work Choices employment reform package which was instrumental in reducing the unemployment rate to 3.9% in July 2007, the lowest in over 30 years.

William Charles Wentworth is famed for crossing the Blue Mountains but was also a political pioneer.Source:News Corp Australia

10. William Charles Wentworth

Vigorously advocated through inflammatory speeches and radical articles against the prevailing winds, the reform of the political and legal structure of the penal colony of Sydney including advocating for a free press, trial by jury and self-government. Wentworths actions contributed to the passing of the New South Wales Act 1823, which instituted a nominated Legislative Council and permitted trial by jury in civil actions only when demanded by both parties.

Wentworth later played a significant role in the Australian Patriotic Association where he drafted reform legislation which was accepted by the Colonial Office in London which enlarged the size of the Legislative Council making it more representative. Wentworth went on to serve in the Legislative Council and helped establish in 1848 a system of state primary education in NSW.

*Odd ones out:

1. No woman

2. No Indigenous person

3. No Robert Menzies the nations longest serving prime minister and founder of the Liberal party

Read more from the original source:
Julian Assange, Paul Keating named in Australia's Top 10 political ... - NEWS.com.au

Andrew Jackson, 1828 and 1832

In an ironic twist, Jacksonwho was arguably the most Trumpian of presidents pastsecured the most popular votes in the 1824 election, only to lose the presidency to John Quincy Adams after the vote was pushed to the House of Representatives. But in the 1828 and 1832 elections, he handedly won the popular vote with 56 percent and 55 percent, respectively.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Van Buren, the eighth president of the United States, garnered a roughly 14-percentage-point margin over his opponent William Henry Harrison in the 1836 popular vote. (Sadly, Harrison would edge him out in four years time.)

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

After losing to Van Buren in the 1836 election, Harrison won the popular vote in the 1840 presidential race by six percentage points.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Like Donald Trump, Polk was viewed as a dark horse candidate. But unlike Trump, Polk actually won the popular vote. (Sure, by a less than a 2-percentage-point marginbut he still won it.)

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

The 12th president of the United States, Taylor won just shy of 5 percentage points more of the popular vote than his opponent Lewis Cass.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Pierce, a president whose name most Americans probably dont even recognize, managed to do one thing Donald Trump could notsecure more than 50 percent of the popular vote.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

While Buchanan failed to nab more than 50 percent of the popular vote, his more than 12-percentage-point margin over his closest opponent shows he still managed to trounce the rest of the field.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Remember this guy? Honest Abe secured more than 10-percentage-point margins over Stephen Douglas and George McClellan in 1860 and 1864 presidential elections, respectively.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Against a guy named Horatio Seymour, Grant won nearly 53 percent of the popular vote in the 1868 election. Then, in 1872, he beat out Horace Greeley, securing more than 55 percent of the popular vote.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Four years after Rutherford B. Hayes embarrassed himself when he lost the popular vote but won the presidency, Garfield narrowly edged out Winfield Hancock in the popular vote by less than 1 percentage point. But heywhat do you call a president who won the popular vote by less than 1 percentage point? A president who won the popular vote.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Like his predecessor James A. Garfield, Cleveland won the presidency in 1884 with a less than 1-percentage-point edge over James Blaine. Cleveland ran again in the 1888 election, wherein he won the popular vote but lost the presidency to Benjamin Harrison. Then in 1892, he garnered just over 46 percent of the popular vote and won the electoral college.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

McKinley won the popular vote in the 1896 and 1900 elections, with margins of more than 4 percentage points and 6 percentage points, respectively.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Teddy a.k.a Haroun-al-Roosevelt, a.k.a. the Dynamo of Power, a.k.a. the Trust Buster dominated his opponents in the 1904 presidential race, securing more than 56 percent of the popular vote.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

In the 1908 presidential election, Taft nabbed more than 51 percent of the popular vote.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

While Wilson didnt win the majority of the popular vote in either presidential election he ran in, he did secure respectable margins of more than 14 percentage points in the 1912 race and of more than 3 percentage points in 1916.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

In the 1920 presidential election, Harding won more than 60 percent of the popular vote.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Coolidge nabbed just over 54 percent of the popular vote in 1924nearly double that of his closest rival, John Davis.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Despite going down in history as one of the least popular presidents in U.S. history, Hoover landed a respectable 58 percent of the popular vote in the 1928 election.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

F.D.R. did what Donald Trump couldntfour times.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Truman won the popular vote in the 1948 presidential election by a margin of more than four percentage points.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Ike, the 34th president of the United States, won the presidential elections handedly in 1952 and 1956, with 55 percent and 57 percent of the popular vote, respectively.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

At the young age of 43, J.F.K. narrowly edged out Richard Nixon by less than 1 percentage point in the popular vote.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

When Johnson ran for re-election after taking over the presidency in the wake of J.F.K.s death, he won more than 61 percent of the popular vote, easily defeating Barry Goldwater.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

In the 1968 presidential election, Nixon won the popular vote by a margin of less than 1 percent. And four years later, in his landslide victory over George McGovern, he won the popular vote by a margin of over 23 percentage points.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

With an edge of just over 2 percentage points, this peanut farmer won what a New York billionaire could notthe popular vote.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Despite his continued attempts to associate himself with Reagans legacy, Trump has already failed to match the 40th president in one area: winning the popular vote. In 1980, Reagan won the popular vote by nearly 10 percentage points, and over 18 percentage points in 1984.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

The elder Bush won the popular vote by nearly 8 percentage points in 1988.

From Getty Images.

Like Donald Trump, the younger Bush knows what it feels like to win the presidency but lose the popular voteas he did in 2000. Four years later, however, Bush escaped the shame and was able to bask in the presidential glory one feels when one wins the popular vote after he edged out John Kerry.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Both of the Clintons won the popular vote. In 1992, Bill edged out George H.W. Bush by more than 5 percentage points, and in 1996 he beat Bob Dole by more than 8 percentage points.

From AFP/Getty Images.

After winning nearly 53 percent and more than 51 percent of the popular vote in 2008 and 2012, respectively, Obama truly knows what it feels like when more than half of the country actually wants you in the White House.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Trump lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by nearly 2.9 million votes.

By Kip Carroll/Rex/Shutterstock.

Excerpt from:
Julian Assange Will Step Out of the Shadows in Risk - Vanity Fair

Julian Assange argued he was illegally confined to the embassy because he risked arrest if he left. Photograph: Pool/Reuters

A United Nations panel has decided that Julian Assanges three-and-a-half years in the Ecuadorian embassy amount to arbitrary detention, the Guardian understands, leading his lawyers to call for the Swedish extradition request to be dropped immediately.

The WikiLeaks founder sought asylum from Ecuador in June 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden to face questioning over rape and sexual assault allegations, which he denies.

The panels findings were disclosed to the Swedish and British governments on 22 January, and will be published on Friday morning. Their judgment is not legally binding but can be used to apply pressure on states in human rights cases.

Related: Julian Assange's embassy showdown: what it means and what happens next

Assanges Swedish lawyer, Per Samuelson, said if the working group found in his favour, there is only one solution for Marianne Ny [the Swedish prosecutor seeking Assanges extradition], and that is to immediately release him and drop the case. Samuelson added: If he is regarded as detained, that means he has served his time, so I see no other option for Sweden but to close the case.

Assanges lawyers also demanded assurances from the UK that he would not be arrested and subjected to potential extradition to face potential prosecution over WikiLeaks publishing activities.

The British Foreign Office said it would not pre-empt the panels findings, but said in a statement: We have been consistently clear that Mr Assange has never been arbitrarily detained by the UK but is, in fact, voluntarily avoiding lawful arrest by choosing to remain in the Ecuadorian embassy.

An allegation of rape is still outstanding and a European arrest warrant in place, so the UK continues to have a legal obligation to extradite Mr Assange to Sweden.

Anna Ekberg, a spokesperson for the Swedish foreign ministry, said it would not comment before the formal publication on Friday. The Swedish prosecutor is currently on holiday and unavailable for comment, a spokesman said.

In a statement issued by WikiLeaks on Twitter, Assange said he would voluntarily walk out of the embassy on Friday and accept arrest as there is no meaningful prospect of further appeal.

However, should I prevail and the state parties be found to have acted unlawfully, I expect the immediate return of my passport and the termination of further attempts to arrest me.

Neither Sweden nor the UK will be compelled to take any action, but a source familiar with the working group said that if the governments choose to ignore the decision, it could make it difficult for them in future to bring pressure on other countries over human rights violations.

Assange had appealed to the UN panel claiming that his stay in the embassy was arbitrary because he had been unable to exercise his right to asylum, arguing: The only way for Mr Assange to enjoy is right to asylum is to be in detention. This is not a legally acceptable choice.

He also argued that UK law had been changed since 2012, which meant if arrested today he would no longer be liable to extradition under the European Arrest Warrant.

Melinda Taylor, an Assange legal spokeswoman, said the Australian had not yet been formally informed by the panel of its findings, but if it finds that the standard for arbitrary detention is met, we would expect his release and compensation.

In addition to Sweden dropping the extradition request, she called for the UK to return Assanges passport and give him assurances that he would not be subject to arrest for a potential further extradition request by the US.

Assange and WikiLeaks have been the subject of a secret grand jury investigation in Virginia that has been looking into whether to prosecute them over the US cable disclosures, and the Australian fears that he could become immediately subject to a second extradition process even if Sweden drops its inquiry.

If one of the orders is that he should be released and his liberty should be assured, we would obviously look to the UK to make sure that it is effective and not illusory, that its not just liberty for five seconds, but liberty that is meaningful, Taylor said.

British police ended the costly 24-hour guard of the Knightsbridge embassy last October, but the building remains under covert surveillance. A Metropolitan police spokesman said on Thursday: The operation to arrest Julian Assange does continue and should he leave the embassy the MPS will make every effort to arrest him.

Sweden and Ecuador have been locked in lengthy negotiations over arrangements to allow Swedish prosecutors to interview Assange in the embassy. Ecuadors foreign minister said last month that the country would allow access for questioning, but Sweden later said its request had been rejected on formal grounds. It is considering whether to submit a fresh request.

Samuelson said his client still hoped to clear his name. This does not mean that the question of interrogation will be over. We still want an interrogation to take place so that Mr Assange can clear his name and show everyone that he is innocent.

The difference is that he will no longer be in custody in absentia and thus be able to use his asylum outside of the embassy. If Assange is regarded as detained he has already served the time so to speak so Marianne Ny should drop the case altogether.

Last August Sweden dropped part of its investigation into Assange after the statute of limitations on allegations of sexual assault expired. It is still seeking to interview him on one outstanding allegation of rape. The accusations were made by two women in Sweden in 2010, but no charges have been brought.

Related: Timeline: Julian Assange and Sweden's prosecutors

Read more:
Julian Assange is in arbitrary detention, UN panel finds ...

But even though he may leave with the support of a United Nations working group, he is still likely to be arrested in Britain on sex crime charges for alleged crimes in Sweden that date back several years.

The U.N. working group is believed to have decided Assange is being unlawfully detained, according to the Press Association, a British news organization. The decision is scheduled to be published Friday.

Assange had said he would surrender to British police for arrest Friday if the U.N. group ruled he had not been unlawfully detained.

However, any judgment by the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention would be only a "moral recommendation" and would not be legally binding. And British police are still expected to arrest Assange if he leaves the Ecuadorian Embassy, where he has been holed up since June 2012.

CNN has not confirmed the decision by the U.N. working group. When asked Thursday, a U.N. spokesperson said: "Tomorrow morning we will release the official opinion of the working group and we cannot comment until the decision is made public tomorrow. Whatever is seen in reports today is not official."

Assange said he submitted a complaint to the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention about his case in 2014. Justice For Assange, a site set up to fight for his release, said the panel is expected to rule this week on whether Assange's detention arbitrarily deprived him of his liberty -- in other words, whether it is illegal.

"Should the UN announce tomorrow that I have lost my case against the United Kingdom and Sweden I shall exit the embassy at noon on Friday to accept arrest by British police," Assange said in a statement posted by WikiLeaks.

But, Assange added that if the panel ruled in his favor, "I expect the immediate return of my passport and the termination of further attempts to arrest me."

London police ended their 24-hour guard of the embassy in October, saying it was no longer "proportionate." But a London Metropolitan Police representative told CNN that the department's position on Assange has not changed, and he would be arrested if he left the embassy, with police considering the use of "covert tactics."

Assange, an Australian, has not been charged and has denied the rape claim. He says it is retaliation for WikiLeaks having released thousands of pages of government secrets.

He has said he fears Sweden would extradite him to the United States, where he could face the death penalty if he is charged and convicted of publishing those documents.

The Swedes, who want to question him for sex crime allegations unrelated to WikiLeaks, issued an arrest warrant in 2010. Assange was in London at the time.

As he fought to have the warrant dismissed, Ecuador granted him political asylum, and he's been living in its London embassy ever since.

In his appeal to the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Assange said his confinement has deprived him of access to fresh air, sunlight and adequate medical care. He says he is subject to round-the-clock surveillance and remains in a constant state of insecurity.

"This is an application framed by political events," he wrote. "(I)t could be distilled to the simple and irrefutable fact that a political refugee, who has never been charged, has been deprived of their liberty for nearly four years, and confined in a very small space for over two years."

In other instances of detention, the U.N. working group called for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar after years of house arrest. The group has also ruled for the release of former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsy, but he remains in prison.

Don Melvin is a newsdesk editor for CNN in London

CNN's Pierre Meilhan contributed to this report.

Link:
Julian Assange says he'll 'accept arrest' if U.N. panel ...

But does this decision mean Assange will become a free man? Or that anything about his status has changed?

Not if you ask Sweden and the United Kingdom. And Assange doesn't appear ready to test them, remaining at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where he first sought refuge in 2012.

Assange is wanted in Sweden on rape allegations, and the UK arrested him in 2010. He has said he's afraid that if he leaves the embassy, he could end up being extradited and facing the death penalty in the United States over allegations of revealing government secrets through his site, WikiLeaks.

Speaking to reporters Friday via video, Assange called the decision "legally binding."

He warned that failure to act on the ruling would undermine "the U.N. system, and there are consequences of doing that." He said Sweden and the UK would not be "treated seriously as international players" and possibly could be taken off key committees or even face sanctions.

"That's, of course, a matter for the U.N. to decide about how it's going to enforce its decision," Assange said, "and a matter for Sweden and the UK to think do they really want to go down that path."

The U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention concedes it is up to member states to act on its decisions, explaining it can only investigate and "recommend remedies such as release from detention and compensation."

And Britain's top diplomat indicated Friday that nothing has changed for the Australian national.

"Assange is a fugitive from justice, voluntarily hiding in the Ecuadorian Embassy," UK Foreign Minister Philip Hammond tweeted. "I reject the report from #UNWGAD."

Attorney Melinda Taylor, who led Assange's case before the U.N. panel, called the ruling "a damning indictment of the manner in which this case has been handled (and) affirms that Mr. Assange is a victim of a significant miscarriage of justice."

"Now finally with today's decision," Taylor said, "there's light at the end of the tunnel."

Yet regardless of what the U.N. panel said, the WikiLeaks founder remains in legal trouble.

WikiLeaks rose to fame posting confidential items such as the U.S. military manual on handling prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, documents from the Church of Scientology, emails from Sarah Palin and pager messages in New York from 9/11. But the website really gained attention in 2010, publishing hundreds of thousands of pages of classified documents related to U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Also in 2010, Sweden revealed Assange was wanted there over a sex crime allegation. Stockholm police questioned him that August and told him about the charges, which he dismissed as part of a smear campaign. Four months later, he turned himself into police in London.

According to Assange, he hasn't been free since.

He was released, with celebrity supporters helping pay his bail and giving him a mansion to live in under house arrest. Still, Sweden fought to have him extradited from the UK.

On June 19, 2012, Assange fled to the Ecuadorian Embassy to escape both British and Swedish authorities.

Ecuador granted him political asylum and, as with other diplomatic missions around the world, its embassy is considered sovereign territory. Assange couldn't be arrested as long as he stayed inside the embassy.

But British authorities were waiting for him outside.

The UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office said Friday that Assange is still subject to a European Arrest Warrant "so the UK continues to have a legal obligation to extradite him to Sweden."

Sweden still wants him back. It also rejected the U.N. panel's judgment, asserting that Assange wasn't forced to go to the Ecuadorian Embassy -- he went there "voluntarily ... and Swedish authorities have no control over his decision to stay there."

"Mr. Assange is free to leave the embassy at any point," the Swedish government said. "Thus, he is not being deprived of his liberty there due to any decision or action taken by the Swedish authorities."

Yet facing justice in Sweden is just one of Assange's concerns. A bigger one may be whether Sweden might extradite him to the United States, where he could theoretically be sentenced to the death penalty if he is charged and convicted of publishing government secrets.

On Friday, Assange's legal team reiterated its fear he'll be moved to the United States. It cast him as a champion of transparency and democracy as well as an unfair, shameful target of Western governments.

"For years, Julian and WikiLeaks fought to expose abuses committed by governments and violations of rights and victims everywhere," said Taylor, Assange's attorney.

"It is now completely unfair that Julian himself has become a victim due to his whistleblowing activities and as a result has suffered uncharged indefinite detention for over five years."

Ecuador's foreign minister, Ricardo Patino, called Assange on Friday to congratulate him on the U.N. judgment and slammed his British counterparts. He told CNN en Espaol that UK authorities should now let Assange travel on to Ecuador.

Patino also expressed concerns about the Australian's health issues, which his attorneys say have been exacerbated by the inability to get outside medical care.

"We are not even sure what's the problem because he needs tests to be done," Patino said. "The UK refuses to allow him to go to a hospital."

Addressing supporters later Friday from the embassy's balcony, Assange reveled in what he called a "sweet ... victory that cannot be denied." But his triumph may be of limited value since he still remains in the embassy.

"It doesn't come as a shock to see the type of injustice that you've been in the business of exposing be inflicted on yourself. That's part of my work," he said. "I am tough and hardened by this process. And I can take it.

"However, what right does this government, or the U.S. government or the Swedish government have to deny my children their father for 5 years?"

CNN's Don Melvin, Josh Berlinger, Jack Maddox, Salma Abdelaziz and Pierre Meilhan contributed to this report.

Continued here:
Julian Assange: WikiLeaks founder 'arbitrarily ... - cnn.com

The international panel said it believed Assanges confinement was arbitrary because of the length of time in bringing his case to resolution. Photograph: Dominic Lipinski/PA

The British government has formally asked a United Nations panel to review its finding that Julian Assange is arbitrarily detained in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, calling the opinion deeply flawed.

In its first formal response to the finding of the UN working group on arbitrary detention, which published its opinion in February, the Foreign Office confirmed it would contest the finding, saying: The original conclusions of the UN working group are inaccurate and should be reviewed.

In a statement, the Foreign Office minister Hugo Swire said: We want to ensure the working group is in possession of the full facts. Our request for a review of the opinion sets those facts out clearly.

Related: Britain 'sets dangerous precedent' by defying UN report on Assange

Julian Assange has never been arbitrarily detained by the UK, and is in fact voluntarily avoiding lawful arrest by choosing to remain in the Ecuadorian embassy. The UK continues to have a legal obligation to extradite him to Sweden.

The WikiLeaks founder has been confined to the embassy in London since July 2012, when he sought asylum in a bid to avoid extradition to Sweden over sexual assault allegations, which he denies.

The international panel said on 4 February that it believed Assanges confinement was arbitrary because of the length of time in bringing his case to resolution, citing in particular a lack of diligence by the Swedish prosecutor in its investigations.

The government argues that the panel is not a judicial body and its findings are therefore not binding. The working groups opinion is deeply flawed and Mr Assange has never been the subject of arbitrary detention, it said. His human rights have been protected throughout the process and will continue to be protected if and when he is extradited to Sweden.

Speaking shortly after the working groups findings were published, Philip Hammond, the foreign secretary, described them as ridiculous and said Assange was hiding from justice.

Assange accused Hammond of insulting the UN, saying: This is the end of the road for the legal arguments that have been put forward by Sweden and the UK.

Responding to the government statement, Melinda Taylor, a legal adviser to Assange, told the Guardian: The fact that they have submitted this request for reconsideration undermines their previous assertion that they werent in any way bound to comply with its opinion.

She said that all the points made by the Foreign Office had been known to the working group before it gave its original opinion, and the UK had every opportunity to make its case and correct any factual errors before the opinion was published.

In the absence of any objective basis to seek reconsideration, this rebuttal appears to be an attempt to publicly undermine the working groups opinion, she said.

The panels decision on whether or not to review its opinion will be made during its next session, beginning 18 April, the Foreign Office said.

More here:
UK seeks review of UN Julian Assange 'arbitrary detention ...

Oppressive states such as Ecuador crush the webs power Nick Cohen Knowledge alone is next to useless in countries whose rulers enforce self-censorship

Ecuadors bombastic president Rafael Correa. Photograph: Fabrizio Bensch/ReutersSunday 6 September 2015 00.05 BSTLast modified on Sunday 6 September 201500.06 BST

Julian Assanges captivity in the Ecuadorian embassy is full of ironies none of them funny which tell us much about the state of freedom of speech, little of it good.

Older readers will remember that the stardust of celebrity fell on Assange in the last decade when his WikiLeaks site published thousands of secret US government cables. He rapidly became infamous, to everyone except his groupies, when one Swedish woman alleged that Assange had raped her and another that he had sexually assaulted her. Assange did not have the courage to face his accusers. He insisted that the Swedish authorities were plotting to deport him to America. Lawyers gently pointed out that America could easily have extradited Assange from Britain, if it had wanted him.

Assange didnt listen to doubters. In June 2012, he sought asylum at 3B Hans Crescent, London SW1, and there he has remained, a prisoner of his own conspiracy theories. The embassy may have a grand address just round the corner from Harrods, but like so many London properties its a pokey flat. If you or I were trapped inside for years with the Metropolitan polices finest waiting to arrest us the moment we stepped outdoors, wed probably go mad.

According to confidential documents leaked by Ecuadorian journalist Fernando Villavicencio to BuzzFeed last week, Assange appears to be doing just that. He has fought with a security guard. He drinks too much and needs psychological support. His evident anger and feelings of superiority could cause stress to those around him, especially the personnel who work in the embassy, mainly women.

For the first time in my life, I feel sorry for Assange. But if you look beyond his degeneration and forget about the allegedly abused Swedish women many of his charming supporters have vilified, this bleak story carries a cheering moral.

WikiLeaks revealed American secrets and there was nothing Americans could do about it. Leftwing Ecuador defended a champion of freedom of information and gave him asylum. But in the age of transparency, its diplomatic cables are as open to inspection as Americas and it too has found its secrets online. However messy the web is, however many criminals and crackpots flourish online, our wired, anarchic world is surely more democratic than what came before. Old sources of power in states, churches and corporations can no longer control what we read and that is progress worth having.

Little about this comforting picture is true. If I can keep you in the cramped quarters of the Ecuadorian embassy for a moment longer, I will attempt to explain why. WikiLeaks did not just shed sunlight on dark corners of US foreign policy. Most of its journalists walked out when they learned that Assange was willing to abase himself before dictators, most notably the president of Belarus, who wanted access to US confidential information about dissident movements that threatened his rule.

Ecuadors rulers are not offering asylum to Assange because they believe in the right to hold power to account, but because Assange is as anti-American as they are. When its own citizens try to tell truth to power, Ecuadors love of liberty vanishes.

It is a petro-socialist authoritarian state. Not a dictatorship, I should add: there are still elections. But the regime hounds those who tell its citizens news it does not want them to hear. So relentless is its determination to control information it has even silenced the scientists at Ecuadors Geophysics Institute, for fear that their warnings of possible eruptions from the Cotopaxi volcano will cause panic . Legal penalties for insulting, or as we might call it criticising, the rulers enforce self-censorship. Traditional and new media do not want to go against Ecuadors bombastic president, Rafael Correa. The case of the embassy leaker, Fernando Villavicencio, makes my point. He complained about police brutality. His punishment was a libel action from the president, a prison sentence and a court order to apologise to the affronted leader.

I am not attempting an ideological assault on Latin American socialism, although I will note in passing that Venezuelas Chavista state is just as bad as Ecuadors failing state. The conservative governments of Orbns Hungary, Putins Russia and Erdogans Turkey all have democratic elements, but they all use the same straitjackets as Ecuador to confine democratic argument.

While a catatonic world was finally waking up to the Syrian refugee crisis, I was speaking to the great Turkish dissident Yavuz Baydar. A columnist on the Turkish daily Hrriyet had used the death of Aylan Kurdi to damn Erdogans treatment of the Turkish and Syrian Kurds, he told me. The state prosecutor immediately announced he would investigate the scandalous remarks and gross insults targeting Erdogan. Every other writer on new and old media got the message.

You will not understand how the hopes for the web have failed so miserably unless you grasp how Francis Bacon was wrong. Knowledge isnt power. Power comes from the freedom to use knowledge. Even if citizens in Ecuador or Turkeycan find information online the state does not want them to see, what good is it if they cannot use it in political campaigns without being arrested? They live in a state of informed impotence, in which they cannot pass on what they know. Without rights protected by an independent judiciary, their knowledge is close to useless.

Anyone who has worked in a hierarchical workplace, the closest thing to an authoritarian society most westerners experience, should understand their predicament. You know your manager is a disaster, a sex pest or a bully, but there is nothing you and your colleagues can do with that information if you fear that speaking out will wreck your careers.

What applies in the workplace applies with a vengeance in public life. Modern communications technologies create a comforting illusion. Because there are hundreds of billions of posts and tweets every year, you can gain the impression that stopping the torrent of information reaching an audience is as impossible as stopping the waves reaching the shore. But someone still needs to do the hard work. Someone still needs to be brave enough to break the story or blow the whistle before the tweeting and the posting can begin. Regimes from Belarus to Ecuador, from Venezuela to Turkey, know that, if they can frighten that someone, and deter others from thinking they should imitate that someone, the torrent will vanish like water down a sinkhole.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/06/internet-gift-world-oppressed-informed-impotence

View original post here:
Support Julian Assange in his quest for Freedom