WikiLeaks’ Assange ‘confident’ ahead of Sweden ruling

Barcelona (AFP) - WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said Wednesday he was "confident" his asylum status will be resolved, as he awaits an imminent ruling on his case by a Swedish court.

A court in Stockholm is expected to rule on Friday on an appeal by Assange's lawyers against the arrest warrant hanging over him for allegations of rape and sexual molestation.

"We will win because the law is very clear. My only hope is that the court is following the law and is not pressured politically to do anything outside of the law," Assange said via a video link screened at a human rights film festival in Barcelona.

Swedish prosecutors want to question the 43-year-old Australian, who could also face trial in the United States over WikiLeaks' publishing a horde of sensitive military and diplomatic communications.

Assange has been holed up since 2012 in London in the embassy of Ecuador, which granted him political asylum the same year.

If the Swedish court scraps the European arrest warrant against Assange, it could mean that he would be able to leave the Ecuadoran embassy.

"As time goes by, political pressure decreases and understanding increases. So I am very confident I will not remain in this situation. I'm completely confident," Assange said.

Assange fears the warrant against him is aimed at eventually extraditing him from Sweden to the United States. Swedish prosecutors said last month that idea was "far-fetched".

Read the rest here:
WikiLeaks' Assange 'confident' ahead of Sweden ruling

add. formats

In an extensive interview that Australian online journalist and broadcaster, WikiLeaks founder Julian Paul Assange gave to Google CEO Eric Schmidt, and that went into just published by the Indian publishing company Navayana Assanges book, When Google Met WikiLeaks, Assange mentioned the history of the police raid on a Swedish ISP of Kavkaz Center.

In a passage from the book, published in the Indian portal Scroll titled "Julian Assange on WikiLeaks mission: preserving content that is under attack", Assange said in particular:

"PRQ had, other than WikiLeaks, the American Homeowners Association, which had to flee from property developers in the United States; the Kavkaz Center, a Caucasus news center which is constantly under attack by the Russians.

In fact PRQ was raided several times by the Swedish government after leverage from the Russian government".

It is to be recalled that the Swedish Prosecution twice confiscated servers of KC, but then by the court it was forced to return them and even once paid KC a fine of 1250.

Raids on the PRQ and confiscation of servers of KC was explained by Swedish Prosecution pointing out to the requests of the government of Russia. Direct order of confiscation of servers of Kavkaz Center was issued by the so-called international prosecutor in Stockholm Hakan Roswall. He said in May 2006 after a raid on the provider of KC:

- "The reason for the confiscation was the official statement of the Russian embassy in Sweden, which accused the news agency Kavkaz Center of incitement to violence".

Department of Monitoring Kavkaz Center

See original here:
add. formats

Assange ‘confident’ ahead of rape case hearing

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange says he's "confident" his asylum status will be resolved, as he awaits an imminent ruling on his case by a Swedish court.

A court in Stockholm is expected to rule on Friday on an appeal by Assange's lawyers against the arrest warrant hanging over him for allegations of rape and sexual molestation.

"We will win because the law is very clear. My only hope is that the court is following the law and is not pressured politically to do anything outside of the law," Assange said via a video link screened at a human rights film festival in Barcelona.

Swedish prosecutors want to question the 43-year-old Australian, who could also face trial in the US over WikiLeaks' publishing a horde of sensitive military and diplomatic communications.

Assange has been holed up since 2012 in London in the embassy of Ecuador, which granted him political asylum the same year.

If the Swedish court scraps the European arrest warrant against Assange, it could mean that he would be able to leave the Ecuadorian embassy.

"As time goes by, political pressure decreases and understanding increases. So I am very confident I will not remain in this situation. I'm completely confident," Assange said.

Assange fears the warrant against him is aimed at eventually extraditing him from Sweden to the US.

Swedish prosecutors said last month that idea was "far-fetched".

AFP

Here is the original post:
Assange 'confident' ahead of rape case hearing

Fashion tips for dissident’s spouse: Vogue dresses up Snowden’s girlfriend. – Video


Fashion tips for dissident #39;s spouse: Vogue dresses up Snowden #39;s girlfriend.
We now know NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden has been re-united with his long-time girlfriend. Lindsay Mills is in Russia and with the change of customs and climate you know living in political...

By: IN THE NOW

Continue reading here:
Fashion tips for dissident's spouse: Vogue dresses up Snowden's girlfriend. - Video

Edward Snowden, Before The Storm: Citizenfour, Reviewed

Movies are lots of things, but "important" isn't one of them. It's not that they can't be meaningful and life-changing, but when a critic's praise tries to go beyond that, it raises red flags for me.

Normally, this happens when the movie takes on a serious subjectthink An Inconvenient Truth or 12 Years a Slave. But the problem is that at that point, we're no longer talking about the merits of the film but, rather, how we feel about the subject matter. (For instance, last year I got a few emails from people who couldn't believe I didn't put 12 Years a Slave in my Top 10: Didn't I care about racism?) Films with serious themes can be great, but when we place the worthiness of the subject above all other considerations, we're not really talking about artistry anymore.

The new documentary Citizenfour is a perfect illustration of this dilemma. I've already heard a few colleagues talk about what an "important" movie this is, and I understand where they're coming from. A significant insider's view of Edward Snowden's attempts last year to blow the lid off the NSA's intrusive surveillance program, the latest from documentarian Laura Poitras is a sobering overview of one of the country's major debates: whether the need for national security outweighs the individual's need for privacy. The result is very good, but its newsworthiness doesn't automatically make it a stunning piece of work.

The third installment in her trilogy of post-9/11 documentaries (joining The Oath and My Country, My Country), Citizenfour recounts how Poitras was one of the few individuals Snowden first contacted when he planned to go public about the information he had on the NSA. The movie's early sections have the suspense of a spy thriller as we read the initial communications between the filmmaker and an individual who identifies as Citizenfour. Soon, we're on the road from Poitras's home in Berlinshe fled the U.S. to avoid harassment from Border Control over her previous documentariesto Hong Kong, where she and journalist Glenn Greenwald meet face to face with the handsome, boyish, 29-year-old Snowden, who felt it his moral obligation to blow the whistle on America's surveillance programs.

Some of the movie's strongest sections concern the buildup to that first meeting and the chronicling of that first week in Hong Kong, as this unlikely collection of individuals decide how best to proceed with the explosive material they're sitting on. (Poitras mostly stays in the background, filming the interactions between Snowden and Greenwald, who is occasionally joined by another reporter, Ewen MacAskill.)

Without overselling the All the President's Men paranoiaalthough the jittery Nine Inch Nails tunes can be a tad muchCitizenfour plunges us into the claustrophobia and anxiety of that hotel room. There's a palpable tension as these people wonder if American officials are going to break down the door at any moment, and how best to respond to the government's inevitable pushback to their reporting. (It certainly doesn't lighten the mood when Snowden informs everyone that any phone could be turned into a listening device remotely, even the phone in his hotel room.) It's so rare to see history documented as it's happening, and Citizenfour succeeds in humanizing the participantsSnowden comes across as thoughtful, but also understandably nervous and a bit overwhelmed by the weight of what's comingwithout diminishing the stakes of their endeavor.

But that you-are-there immediacy is mitigated a bit by the rest of the movie. Not simply a fascinating journalistic story about how the Snowden revelations came about, Citizenfour also wants to look at our New Normal as American citizens go through their days being monitored by the government at all times. And it's here that I think the film lurches toward being "important" rather than illuminating. The sad fact is that Poitras's insights are now grimly familiar: The government tracks our movements far more intensely than it admits, ours is not the only country involved in this aggressive surveillance, and Obama doesn't seem to have done anything to stop this Bush-era program.

Since 9/11, we've become accustomed (begrudgingly or not) to a loss of individual liberty in order to fight the War on Terror. As with our annoyance with Facebook's inadvertent treasure trove of dirt on us, we're irritated by the NSAbut not enough that we'll do anything about it. Citizenfour interviews such experts as former NSA official William Binney, who has been a vocal opponent of the agency since retiring in 2001, but it can't quite provoke our outrage. In part, that's because we already know what Snowden revealed to the world, but I also suspect it's because we've become so suspicious of our government that there's little it can do at this point to really surprise us with its insidiousness.

The first two films in Poitras's trilogy benefited from her deep embedding in intimate, small-scale stories. My Country, My Country was an impressionistic 2006 snapshot of life among ordinary Iraqis as the U.S. occupation was occurring; The Oath was a rather amazing 2010 tale of a former Osama bin Laden bodyguard. The specificity of those stories served as a platform for a larger discussion about how the rest of the world changed after 9/11, taking the emphasis off of our own sorrow and making us focus on the real trauma we unleashed on others, many of whom were innocent bystanders.

View original post here:
Edward Snowden, Before The Storm: Citizenfour, Reviewed

Snowden filmmaker Laura Poitras: ‘Facebook is a gift to intelligence agencies’

In January 2013, Academy Award-nominated filmmaker Laura Poitras received an e-mail that would eventually change what the world knew about government surveillance. The e-mail came from Edward Snowden, using the alias Citizenfour. That alias is thetitle of Poitras'slatest documentary, an intimate portrait of the eight days she spent in Hong Kong with the former National Security Agency contractor as the first of his revelations made headlines around the world. Citizenfour will open with a limited release in New York, Washington and Los Angeles on Friday.

Poitras, who received a Pulitzer Prize for her work with The Washington Post and the Guardian covering the revelations, sat down with the Switch to discuss the film and how technical advances may make it easier for us to keep ouronline lives private. This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Andrea Peterson: One of the things I found very interesting about the film is how intimate of a portrayal of Snowden it is. But as I understand it you were already working on a film about government surveillance in a post-9/11 world, and a lot of that didn't end up making it into the final film. Can you talk about how you made the decision to hone in?

Laura Poitras: In 2011, I started doing some filming with several people. I was interested in not only NSA surveillance but also what was happening with journalism and the sort of zeitgeist. So I filmed with Glenn[Greenwald, who worked with Poitras and the Guardian to break the first Snowden stories] -- I said, "Who is this guy in Rio, sort of off the grid, but having this sort of influence?" I wanted to film where he was and where he worked, so I did that. And then Ialsostarted filming[NSA whistleblower] William Binney. This was at the time that [NSA whistleblower] Thomas Drake [was facing] espionage charges, and it looked like he was going to trial. It was the first time named NSA people started coming forward. So I started filming with the NSA -- and with Binney, he was sort of the architect of the surveillance system that is now something turned inwards.

I also started filming with Jacob Appelbaum, who does anti-surveillance stuff, trains activists all over the world and works with the Tor Project, etc., as well as with Wikileaks and Julian Assange. I was also interested in talking about how there were these new spaces opening up in journalism, and how with their disclosures they worked with multiple news organizations. It felt like it raised the bar in terms of journalism that was more adversarial to the government.

I was deep into filming when I got the first e-mail from Snowden, which was in January of 2013. I had published a short piece on William Binney in the New York Times in summer of 2012, and that was something [Snowden]had seen, so that's probably one of the reasons he knew I was interested in the topic.

In terms of how it shifted -- it obviously shifted enormously once I was contacted and drawn into the story in a different way. I became a participant in the narrative. And then after returning from Hong Kong, it was clear that two films had been shot and that the one that was about Snowden was one that I was a participant in. That's the trajectory of it. But it was an obvious choice -- it was obvious once we looked at the footage;it was clear that Hong Kong would be such an important piece of the film that it became the organizing principle around which other things fell into place.

A.P.: You actually beat me to my next question. You are a character in the film, you're very key to how everything unfolds. But besides some textinterstitialsand your reading of e-mails from Snowden, you really don't appear on camera... Was that a conscious choice?

L.P.: I consider that I'm sort of the narrator of the film, and it's obvious that it's told in the first person and it's a subjective film. I also come from a filmmaking tradition where I'm using the camera -- it's my lens to express the filmmaking I do. In the same way that a writer uses their language, for me it's the images that tell the story. So it's very hard for me to be in front of the camera and shoot -- and in Hong Kong, there was no other crew. For me, the camera is my tool for documenting things, so I stay mostly behind it.

A.P.: There were also some very interesting aspects of thewhole story that seemed omitted. For instance, and obviously you weren't personally there to film it, but how he escaped from Hong Kong and spent 40days in a Moscow airport. Also from what I understand some of the back and forth between yourself and Greenwald and Wikileaks about how things should move forward... Can you talk about how you made decisions about what to include?

Link:
Snowden filmmaker Laura Poitras: ‘Facebook is a gift to intelligence agencies’

Why the NSA is breaking our encryption — and why we should care | Matthew Green | TEDxMidAtlantic – Video


Why the NSA is breaking our encryption -- and why we should care | Matthew Green | TEDxMidAtlantic
This talk was given at a local TEDx event, produced independently of the TED Conferences. Encryption dates back to the Founding Fathers and the Bill of Rights. Now, the United States National...

By: TEDx Talks

View post:
Why the NSA is breaking our encryption -- and why we should care | Matthew Green | TEDxMidAtlantic - Video