+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 31 FirstFirst 1 11 21 31 LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 612

Thread: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

  1. Link to Post #201
    UK Moderator/Librarian/Administrator Tintin's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd June 2017
    Location
    Project Avalon library
    Language
    English
    Age
    54
    Posts
    5,447
    Thanks
    64,676
    Thanked 46,626 times in 5,415 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    And here's another interesting piece of news:

    Link: https://www.rohrabacher.com/news

    My Meeting with Julian Assange
    2/19/2020 from Dana Rohrabacher


    ​There is a lot of misinformation floating out there regarding my meeting with Julian Assange so let me provide some clarity on the matter:

    At no time did I talk to President Trump about Julian Assange. Likewise, I was not directed by Trump or anyone else connected with him to meet with Julian Assange. I was on my own fact finding mission at personal expense to find out information I thought was important to our country. I was shocked to find out that no other member of Congress had taken the time in their official or unofficial capacity to interview Julian Assange.

    At no time did I offer Julian Assange anything from the President because I had not spoken with the President about this issue at all. However, when speaking with Julian Assange, I told him that if he could provide me information and evidence about who actually gave him the DNC emails, I would then call on President Trump to pardon him. At no time did I offer a deal made by the President, nor did I say I was representing the President.

    Upon my return, I spoke briefly with Gen. Kelly. I told him that Julian Assange would provide information about the purloined DNC emails in exchange for a pardon. No one followed up with me including Gen. Kelly and that was the last discussion I had on this subject with anyone representing Trump or in his Administration.

    Even though I wasn't successful in getting this message through to the President I still call on him to pardon Julian Assange, who is the true whistleblower of our time. Finally, we are all holding our breath waiting for an honest investigation into the murder of Seth Rich.
    “If a man does not keep pace with [fall into line with] his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” - Thoreau

  2. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

    Arcturian108 (24th February 2020), Bill Ryan (24th February 2020), ByTheNorthernSea (20th February 2020), Franny (24th February 2020), Ivanhoe (20th February 2020), Kryztian (23rd February 2020), onawah (20th February 2020), Pam (23rd February 2020), T Smith (20th February 2020)

  3. Link to Post #202
    UK Moderator/Librarian/Administrator Tintin's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd June 2017
    Location
    Project Avalon library
    Language
    English
    Age
    54
    Posts
    5,447
    Thanks
    64,676
    Thanked 46,626 times in 5,415 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    "That Assange has been right all along, and getting him to Sweden was a fraud to cover an American plan to "render" him, is finally becoming clear to many who swallowed the incessant scuttlebutt of character assassination.
    "I speak fluent Swedish and was able to read all the original documents," Nils Melzer, the United Nations Rapporteur on Torture, said recently, "I could hardly believe my eyes. According to the testimony of the woman in question, a rape had never taken place at all. And not only that: the woman's testimony was later changed by the Stockholm Police without her involvement in order to somehow make it sound like a possible rape. I have all the documents in my possession, the emails, the text messages.""
    ------------------------------------

    JULIAN ASSANGE MUST BE FREED, NOT BETRAYED
    18 February 2020

    John Pilger
    Source: http://johnpilger.com/articles/julia...d-not-betrayed

    Name:  Banksy_Free_Assange.jpg
Views: 108
Size:  61.9 KB

    On Saturday, there will be a march from Australia House in London to Parliament Square, the centre of British democracy. People will carry pictures of the Australian publisher and journalist Julian Assange who, on 24 February, faces a court that will decide whether or not he is to be extradited to the United States and a living death.

    I know Australia House well. As an Australian myself, I used to go there in my early days in London to read the newspapers from home. Opened by King George V over a century ago, its vastness of marble and stone, chandeliers and solemn portraits, imported from Australia when Australian soldiers were dying in the slaughter of the First World War, have ensured its landmark as an imperial pile of monumental servility.

    As one of the oldest "diplomatic missions" in the United Kingdom, this relic of empire provides a pleasurable sinecure for Antipodean politicians: a "mate" rewarded or a troublemaker exiled.

    Known as High Commissioner, the equivalent of an ambassador, the current beneficiary is George Brandis, who as Attorney General tried to water down Australia's Race Discrimination Act and approved raids on whistleblowers who had revealed the truth about Australia's illegal spying on East Timor during negotiations for the carve-up of that impoverished country's oil and gas.

    This led to the prosecution of whistleblowers Bernard Collaery and "Witness K", on bogus charges. Like Julian Assange, they are to be silenced in a Kafkaesque trial and put away.

    Australia House is the ideal starting point for Saturday's march.

    "I confess," wrote Lord Curzon, Viceroy of India, in 1898, "that countries are pieces on a chessboard upon which is being played out a great game for the domination of the world.""

    We Australians have been in the service of the Great Game for a very long time. Having devastated our Indigenous people in an invasion and a war of attrition that continues to this day, we have spilt blood for our imperial masters in China, Africa, Russia, the Middle East, Europe and Asia. No imperial adventure against those with whom we have no quarrel has escaped our dedication.

    Deception has been a feature. When Prime Minister Robert Menzies sent Australian soldiers to Vietnam in the 1960s, he described them as a training team, requested by a beleaguered government in Saigon. It was a lie. A senior official of the Department of External Affairs wrote secretly that "although we have stressed the fact publicly that our assistance was given in response to an invitation by the government of South Vietnam", the order came from Washington.

    Two versions. The lie for us, the truth for them. As many as four million people died in the Vietnam war.

    When Indonesia invaded East Timor in 1975, the Australian Ambassador, Richard Woolcott, secretly urged the government in Canberra to "act in a way which would be designed to minimise the public impact in Australia and show private understanding to Indonesia." In other words, to lie. He alluded to the beckoning spoils of oil and gas in the Timor Sea which, boasted Foreign Minister Gareth Evans, were worth "zillions".

    In the genocide that followed, at least 200,000 East Timorese died. Australia recognised, almost alone, the legitimacy of the occupation.

    When Prime Minister John Howard sent Australian special forces to invade Iraq with America and Britain in 2003, he - like George W. Bush and Tony Blair - lied that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. More than a million people died in Iraq.

    WikiLeaks was not the first to call out the pattern of criminal lying in democracies that remain every bit as rapacious as in Lord Curzon's day. The achievement of the remarkable publishing organisation founded by Julian Assange has been to provide the proof.

    WikiLeaks has informed us how illegal wars are fabricated, how governments are overthrown and violence is used in our name, how we are spied upon through our phones and screens. The true lies of presidents, ambassadors, political candidates, generals, proxies, political fraudsters have been exposed. One by one, these would-be emperors have realised they have no clothes.

    It has been an unprecedented public service; above all, it is authentic journalism, whose value can be judged by the degree of apoplexy of the corrupt and their apologists.

    For example, in 2016, WikiLeaks published the leaked emails of Hillary Clinton's campaign manager John Podesta, which revealed a direct connection between Clinton, the foundation she shares with her husband and the funding of organised jihadism in the Middle East - terrorism.

    One email disclosed that Islamic State (ISIS) was bankrolled by the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar, from which Clinton accepted huge "donations". Moreover, as US Secretary of State, she approved the world's biggest ever arms sale to her Saudi benefactors, worth more than $80 billion. Thanks to her, US arms sales to the world - for use in stricken countries like Yemen - doubled.

    Revealed by WikiLeaks and published in The New York Times, the Podesta emails triggered a vituperative campaign against editor-in-chief Julian Assange, bereft of evidence. He was an "agent of Russia working to elect Trump"; the nonsensical "Russiagate" followed. That WikiLeaks had also published more than 800,000 frequently damning documents from Russia was ignored.

    On an Australian Broadcasting Corporation programme, Four Corners, in 2017, Clinton was interviewed by Sarah Ferguson, who began: "No one could fail to be moved by the pain on your face at [the moment of Donald Trump's inauguration] ... Do you remember how visceral it was for you?"

    Having established Clinton's visceral suffering, the fawning Ferguson described "Russia's role" and the "damage done personally to you" by Julian Assange.

    Clinton replied, "He [Assange] is very clearly a tool of Russian intelligence. And he has done their bidding."

    Ferguson said to Clinton, "Lots of people, including in Australia, think that Assange is a martyr of free speech and freedom of information. How would you describe him?"

    Again, Clinton was allowed to defame Assange - a "nihilist" in the service of "dictators" - while Ferguson assured her interviewee she was "the icon of your generation".

    There was no mention of a leaked document, revealed by WikiLeaks, called Libya Tick Tock, prepared for Hillary Clinton, which described her as the central figure driving the destruction of the Libyan state in 2011. This resulted in 40,000 deaths, the arrival of ISIS in North Africa and the European refugee and migrant crisis.

    For me, this episode of Clinton's interview - and there are many others - vividly illustrates the division between false and true journalism. On 24 February, when Julian Assange steps into Woolwich Crown Court, true journalism will be the only crime on trial.

    I am sometimes asked why I have championed Assange. For one thing, I like and I admire him. He is a friend with astonishing courage; and he has a finely honed, wicked sense of humour. He is the diametric opposite of the character invented then assassinated by his enemies.

    As a reporter in places of upheaval all over the world, I have learned to compare the evidence I have witnessed with the words and actions of those with power. In this way, it is possible to get a sense of how our world is controlled and divided and manipulated, how language and debate are distorted to produce the propaganda of false consciousness.

    When we speak about dictatorships, we call this brainwashing: the conquest of minds. It is a truth we rarely apply to our own societies, regardless of the trail of blood that leads back to us and which never dries.

    WikiLeaks has exposed this. That is why Assange is in a maximum security prison in London facing concocted political charges in America, and why he has shamed so many of those paid to keep the record straight. Watch these journalists now look for cover as it dawns on them that the American fascists who have come for Assange may come for them, not least those on the Guardian who collaborated with WikiLeaks and won prizes and secured lucrative book and Hollywood deals based on his work, before turning on him.

    In 2011, David Leigh, the Guardian's "investigations editor", told journalism students at City University in London that Assange was "quite deranged". When a puzzled student asked why, Leigh replied, "Because he doesn't understand the parameters of conventional journalism".

    But it's precisely because he did understand that the "parameters" of the media often shielded vested and political interests and had nothing to do with transparency that the idea of WikiLeaks was so appealing to many people, especially the young, rightly cynical about the so-called "mainstream".

    Leigh mocked the very idea that, once extradited, Assange would end up "wearing an orange jumpsuit". These were things, he said, "that he and his lawyer are saying in order to feed his paranoia".

    The current US charges against Assange centre on the Afghan Logs and Iraq Logs, which the Guardian published and Leigh worked on, and on the Collateral Murder video showing an American helicopter crew gunning down civilians and celebrating the crime. For this journalism, Assange faces 17 charges of "espionage" which carry prison sentences totalling 175 years.

    Whether or not his prison uniform will be an "orange jumpsuit", US court files seen by Assange's lawyers reveal that, once extradited, Assange will be subject to Special Administrative Measures, known as SAMS. A 2017 report by Yale University Law School and the Center for Constitutional Rights described SAMS as "the darkest corner of the US federal prison system" combining "the brutality and isolation of maximum security units with additional restrictions that deny individuals almost any connection to the human world ... The net effect is to shield this form of torture from any real public scrutiny."

    That Assange has been right all along, and getting him to Sweden was a fraud to cover an American plan to "render" him, is finally becoming clear to many who swallowed the incessant scuttlebutt of character assassination. "I speak fluent Swedish and was able to read all the original documents," Nils Melzer, the United Nations Rapporteur on Torture, said recently, "I could hardly believe my eyes. According to the testimony of the woman in question, a rape had never taken place at all. And not only that: the woman's testimony was later changed by the Stockholm Police without her involvement in order to somehow make it sound like a possible rape. I have all the documents in my possession, the emails, the text messages."

    Keir Starmer is currently running for election as leader of the Labour Party in Britain. Between 2008 and 2013, he was Director of Public Prosecutions and responsible for the Crown Prosecution Service. According to Freedom of Information searches by the Italian journalist Stefania Maurizi, Sweden tried to drop the Assange case in 2011, but a CPS official in London told the Swedish prosecutor not to treat it as "just another extradition".

    In 2012, she received an email from the CPS: "Don't you dare get cold feet!!!" Other CPS emails were either deleted or redacted. Why? Keir Starmer needs to say why.

    At the forefront of Saturday's march will be John Shipton, Julian's father, whose indefatigable support for his son is the antithesis of the collusion and cruelty of the governments of Australia, our homeland.

    The roll call of shame begins with Julia Gillard, the Australian Labor prime minister who, in 2010, wanted to criminalise WikiLeaks, arrest Assange and cancel his passport - until the Australian Federal Police pointed out that no law allowed this and that Assange had committed no crime.

    While falsely claiming to give him consular assistance in London, it was the Gillard government's shocking abandonment of its citizen that led to Ecuador granting political asylum to Assange in its London embassy.

    In a subsequent speech before the US Congress, Gillard, a favourite of the US embassy in Canberra, broke records for sycophancy (according to the website Honest History) as she declared, over and again, the fidelity of America's "mates Down Under".

    Today, while Assange waits in his cell, Gillard travels the world, promoting herself as a feminist concerned about "human rights", often in tandem with that other right-on feminist Hillary Clinton.

    The truth is that Australia could have rescued Julian Assange and can still rescue him.

    In 2010, I arranged to meet a prominent Liberal (Conservative) Member of Parliament, Malcolm Turnbull. As a young barrister in the 1980s, Turnbull had successfully fought the British Government's attempts to prevent the publication of the book, Spycatcher, whose author Peter Wright, a spy, had exposed Britain's "deep state".

    We talked about his famous victory for free speech and publishing and I described the miscarriage of justice awaiting Assange - the fraud of his arrest in Sweden and its connection with an American indictment that tore up the US Constitution and the rule of international law.

    Turnbull appeared to show genuine interest and an aide took extensive notes. I asked him to deliver a letter to the Australian government from Gareth Peirce, the renowned British human rights lawyer who represents Assange.

    In the letter, Peirce wrote, "Given the extent of the public discussion, frequently on the basis of entirely false assumptions... it is very hard to attempt to preserve for [Julian Assange] any presumption of innocence. Mr. Assange has now hanging over him not one but two Damocles swords, of potential extradition to two different jurisdictions in turn for two different alleged crimes, neither of which are crimes in his own country, and that his personal safety has become at risk in circumstances that are highly politically charged."

    Turnbull promised to deliver the letter, follow it through and let me know. I subsequently wrote to him several times, waited and heard nothing.

    In 2018, John Shipton wrote a deeply moving letter to the then prime minister of Australia asking him to exercise the diplomatic power at his government's disposal and bring Julian home. He wrote that he feared that if Julian was not rescued, there would be a tragedy and his son would die in prison. He received no reply. The prime minister was Malcolm Turnbull.

    Last year, when the current prime minister, Scott Morrison, a former public relations man, was asked about Assange, he replied in his customary way, "He should face the music!"

    When Saturday's march reaches the Houses of Parliament, said to be "the Mother of Parliaments", Morrison and Gillard and Turnbull and all those who have betrayed Julian Assange should be called out; history and decency will not forget them or those who remain silent now.

    And if there is any sense of justice left in the land of Magna Carta, the travesty that is the case against this heroic Australian must be thrown out. Or beware, all of us.

    http://johnpilger.com/
    @johnpilger

    Last edited by Tintin; 20th February 2020 at 13:05.
    “If a man does not keep pace with [fall into line with] his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” - Thoreau

  4. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

    Arcturian108 (24th February 2020), Ba-ba-Ra (20th February 2020), Bill Ryan (24th February 2020), Billy (20th February 2020), Dennis Leahy (20th February 2020), earthdreamer (21st February 2020), Franny (24th February 2020), Innocent Warrior (28th February 2020), onawah (20th February 2020), Pam (23rd February 2020)

  5. Link to Post #203
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,209
    Thanks
    47,682
    Thanked 116,099 times in 20,640 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    Julian Assange "Stop Extradition Protest" in London with Varoufakis, Vivienne Westwood & more!
    Feb 22, 2020
    acTVism Munich
    41.8K subscribers
    ✔ More videos coming on this topic. Subscribe here: https://goo.gl/aMkRjb

    "In this video we document the protest that took place in London on the 22nd of February 2020 to stop the extradition of Julian Assange. This protest was organised by the "Don't Extradite Assange Campaign" .

    CORRECTION IN VIDEO AT 00:14: " ... and 1 count of conspiracy "to commit computer intrusion”."

    To view more videos on this topics:
    ► Julian Assange - Public Rally Event:
    https://youtu.be/QahCPwrZfJY
    ► Interview with Assange's Father:
    https://youtu.be/roiyDkNbOkc
    ► Interview with Nils Melzer:
    https://youtu.be/f9KRxF9oVxQ
    ► Report of the 4th of February public rally
    https://youtu.be/AqEz3y4cn0Y
    ► Abby Martin, Snowden, Chomsky, Jill Stein, Varoufakis, Horvat & Richter Respond: https://youtu.be/39IUOeQvaOw

    FOLLOW US ONLINE:
    ► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/acTVism/
    ► Instagram: actv_munich
    ► Website: http://www.actvism.org/
    ► Twitter: https://twitter.com/acTVismMunich
    ► YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/acTVismMunich/

    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Arcturian108 (24th February 2020), Bill Ryan (24th February 2020), Franny (24th February 2020), Pam (23rd February 2020), Tintin (24th February 2020)

  7. Link to Post #204
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,209
    Thanks
    47,682
    Thanked 116,099 times in 20,640 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    Assange most important symbol of press freedom today – journalist
    Feb 22, 2020
    RT America
    1.07M subscribers

    "WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been detained in London’s Belmarsh Prison for almost a year now, but is about to face a month-long hearing next week which will decide whether he can be extradited to the US. He faces up to 175 years in prison and 18 counts under the Espionage Act. Editor-in-chief of Consortium News Joe Lauria breaks it all down. "

    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  8. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (24th February 2020), Franny (24th February 2020), Kryztian (23rd February 2020), Pam (23rd February 2020), Tintin (24th February 2020)

  9. Link to Post #205
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,209
    Thanks
    47,682
    Thanked 116,099 times in 20,640 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    Roger Waters: Washington DC Have Decided They Want Julian Assange Killed
    Going Underground on RT
    Feb 22, 2020

    "On this episode of Going Underground, Going Underground's Social Media Producer Farhaan Ahmed speaks to Richard Burgon MP who is standing to be Deputy Leader of the Labour Party. He discusses the importance of Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange's leaks, what his extradition could mean for press freedom in the UK and around the world and why his extradition should be halted. Next, legendary former Pink Floyd frontman Roger Waters speaks to Afshin Rattansi about the persecution of Julian Assange, ahead of Julian's upcoming extradition trial. He discusses why he believes Washington DC is seeking to imprison Julian Assange for 175 years, the importance of his leaks for billions around the world, the Washington-backed regime change attempt in Venezuela and coup in Bolivia and more! Finally, Farhaan Ahmed speaks to BAFTA Award-Winning actor Steve Coogan and BAFTA Award-Winning Director Michael Winterbottom about their new film 'Greed', a comedy highlighting billionaire excess and the gap between the super-rich and the super-poor."

    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  10. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (24th February 2020), Pam (23rd February 2020), Tintin (24th February 2020)

  11. Link to Post #206
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,209
    Thanks
    47,682
    Thanked 116,099 times in 20,640 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    Very puzzling development-- a move on the part of Assange's defense team which could prove disastrous ??
    Assange Rorabacher final
    Feb 23, 2020
    The Duran

    Last edited by onawah; 23rd February 2020 at 20:16.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  12. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Arcturian108 (24th February 2020), Bill Ryan (24th February 2020), Chester (23rd February 2020), Franny (24th February 2020), Tintin (24th February 2020)

  13. Link to Post #207
    United States Avalon Member Chester's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th December 2011
    Location
    into my third life within this one
    Language
    English
    Age
    66
    Posts
    6,069
    Thanks
    34,011
    Thanked 33,205 times in 5,691 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    I would like to see the specific statements made by the Assange attorney to the UK court. Why? Because all the news organizations reporting on this only summarize in their own words what was supposedly conveyed to the court.

    As those on this forum (and those who can read these parts of the forum) know... there is reason to believe the e-mails came via copy to a flash drive (see Bill Binney) and extracted by Seth Rich (a big Bernie Sanders supported who, some speculate, was angry as to what the DNC was doing to cheat Sanders out of the nomination). Then there is the individual (I cannot locate his name at the moment) that played a role as currier whose "in hiding?"

    A wild conspiracy theory for sure. Yet why was the investigator who brought this theory out to the public on FOX News at that time so quickly squashed?

    And check this out... I am certain there are all sorts of links on the internet that explore this alternative theory, yet when typing in "who got the DNC emails to assange?" on Google, you can't find a single one in the first 3 pages and only a few articles questioning the "established theory - Russia did it" on the next few? We know how Google works and we know how they scrub matters such as this. Why go to the truouble when its just some whacky conspiracy theory?

    So I would think the exact words provided by the attorney to the UK court are made public because if they are not, I would not be surprised the actual words were used as a basis to spin them as the media has done. That seems like the odds on likelihood in my most humble (and often wrong) opinion.

    Add one more thought... why is Australia working so hard to keep Assange from being extradited? Assange has so far shown resolute principle with regards to protecting sources. I think Assange would die, or worse, spend the rest of his life in the solitary cell formerly occupied by Manafort to maintain protecting his sources. But this allows Assange to do one thing, that which he did clearly before, in the interview with Sean Hannity - deny it was Russia.

    Note: Early on Wikileaks offered the $20,000 reward for Seth Rich's killer. August of 2016. No one thought Trump would win. What are the chances Trump (through some emissary) could have approached some high up (trusted) Wikileaks official to put that out there just in case Trump wins? And along with that, offer a pardon if he does?

    The desperation on the deep state, ET AL. to do everything they can, once again, to curtail as much as possible, the power Trump and the election results (the Senate being "key" but if the House also... huge!) would wield if/when he wins in November... and this is obvious. The public sees the scam. The public sees all the stakeholders in the scam and why they do what they do.

    So before all the speculations as to "the apparent dumb risk" taken by the Assange legal team is solidified, I think its important to know exactly, word for word, what Assange's attroney told the UK court.
    All the above is all and only my opinion - all subject to change and not meant to be true for anyone else regardless of how I phrase it.

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Chester For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (24th February 2020), onawah (23rd February 2020), Tintin (24th February 2020)

  15. Link to Post #208
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,209
    Thanks
    47,682
    Thanked 116,099 times in 20,640 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    Agreed! It probably won't take long.
    Quote Posted by Sammy (here)
    I would like to see the specific statements made by the Assange attorney to the UK court. Why? Because all the news organizations reporting on this only summarize in their own words what was supposedly conveyed to the court.

    So before all the speculations as to "the apparent dumb risk" taken by the Assange legal team is solidified, I think its important to know exactly, word for word, what Assange's attroney told the UK court.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  16. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (24th February 2020), Chester (23rd February 2020), Tintin (24th February 2020)

  17. Link to Post #209
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,209
    Thanks
    47,682
    Thanked 116,099 times in 20,640 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    Julian Assange - Belmarsh Prison visit by Yanis Varoufakis
    Feb 23, 2020
    acTVism Munich

    ✔ More videos coming on this topic. Subscribe here: https://goo.gl/aMkRjb

    "In this video we travel to the Belmarsh prison and talk to Yanis Varoufakis to gains insights on the condition of Julian Assange. Yanis Varoufakis visited Julian Assange with John Shipton (father of Assange) earlier on the same day (23rd of February, 2020)."

    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  18. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (24th February 2020), Franny (10th March 2020), Innocent Warrior (25th February 2020), Tintin (25th February 2020)

  19. Link to Post #210
    UK Moderator/Librarian/Administrator Tintin's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd June 2017
    Location
    Project Avalon library
    Language
    English
    Age
    54
    Posts
    5,447
    Thanks
    64,676
    Thanked 46,626 times in 5,415 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    It appears Patrick Henningsen from 21st Century Wire may perhaps have been able to secure one of the fourteen (yes, you read that right, fourteen ) public seats available in the (kangaroo) court inside Belmarsh prison (?) I know Craig Murray was hoping to get a ringside seat as well.

    Here's Patrick's latest news which seems to be coming pretty hot-off-the-press:



    From Craig:

    “If a man does not keep pace with [fall into line with] his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” - Thoreau

  20. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th February 2020), Franny (10th March 2020), Innocent Warrior (25th February 2020), onawah (24th February 2020)

  21. Link to Post #211
    United States Avalon Member Dennis Leahy's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th January 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Language
    English
    Age
    69
    Posts
    6,741
    Thanks
    47,010
    Thanked 48,583 times in 5,817 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    Consortium News is in London to cover the formal extradition process of WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange and will provide updates today and throughout the week.
    6:45 pm London time: WikiLeaks tweets that the defense will present its case “in earnest” on Tuesday at Woolwich Crown Court. Consortium News will continue its Live Updates Tuesday unless it gets a place inside the courtroom, in which case we will present a full report at the end of the day.
    Defense begins in earnest Tomorrow https://t.co/fgq8D0zptr
    — WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) February 24, 2020
    Assange’s lawyer tells court prosecution cares little for justice and is politically motivated. Says extradition should be barred because of prosecutions’ “political motives.” Judge is told that Assange will not likely give testimony during this opening week of the hearing.
    Julian Assange's lawyer Edward Fitzgerald QC: "Prosecution is not motivated by genuine concern for criminal justice but by politics.
    "This extradition should be barred because the prosecution is being pursued for political motives and not in good faith."
    — Tristan Kirk (@kirkkorner) February 24, 2020
    He says Assange would face "inhuman and degrading treatment" and attacks Pres. Trump: "(He) came into power with a new approach for freedom of the press… amounting effectively to declaring war on investigative journalists."
    — Tristan Kirk (@kirkkorner) February 24, 2020
    Mr Fitzgerald restates the claim that Assange was offered a pardon through a Trump intermediary, and says Assange will dispute the 'misleading' claim that WikiLeaks published unredacted cables.
    — Tristan Kirk (@kirkkorner) February 24, 2020
    Judge told it is 'very unlikely' that Julian Assange will give evidence during the extradition hearing.
    — Tristan Kirk (@kirkkorner) February 24, 2020
    3:10 pm London time: U.S. lawyer in court is trying to turn normal journalistic practice into a crime by confusing Assange’s attempts to help Chelsea Manning (who had top secret clearance and legal access to the documents she leaked) hide her identity by logging in as an administrator, not to help her hack the material, which she didn’t need to do. The two indictments against Assange make it perfectly clear that that is what happened and that Assange was not engaged in hacking.
    Nearing the end of his #Assange opening, US lawyer mentions phone hacking by the News of the World: "There's no licence to commit a criminal offence simply because you say it's for a journalistic purpose. There is no public interest defence under the Computer Misuse Act".
    — Tristan Kirk (@kirkkorner) February 24, 2020
    2:55 pm London time: The hundreds of people demonstrating outside Woolwich Crown Court are making so much noise that it is making it difficult to hear inside the courtroom. Even Assange said so.
    Julian Assange has told the court he is "having difficulty concentrating – this noise is not helpful".
    He wants the demo to stop disrupting the court proceedings.
    "I'm very appreciative of the public support, I understand they must be disgusted", #Assange said. https://t.co/MJ6WIfrctW
    — Tristan Kirk (@kirkkorner) February 24, 2020
    2:50 pm London time: WikiLeaks Editor-in-Chief Kristinn Hrafnsson has left the courthouse and addressed the media. He asked why the court was discussing the alleged harm done by the releases on Afghanistan and Iraq in 2010 and not the war crimes that those documents revealed. “That is what we should be talking about in a courtroom in this country.
    Breaking: @khrafnsson leaves courtroom and asks "why aren't we here talking in court about the war crimes, the assassination of innocent civilians?" #assange@TheCanaryUK pic.twitter.com/zXCRjqq5db
    — John McEvoy (@jmcevoy_2) February 24, 2020
    12:08 pm London time: Julian Assange’s father, John Shipton, spoke with the press outside the courthouse during a break and denounced the prosecutors’ allegation that Assange had endangered the lives of U.S. informants:
    “The essential part of the argument of the prosectors’ case is that WikiLeaks publications endangered sources. This is simply not true. The Pentagon admitted, under oath, in Chelsea Manning’s trial that nobody had been hurt by the releases.
    Robert Gates, ex-secretary of defense, in testimony before Congress said it’s awkward, it’s embarrassing, but no damage was done. I’ll note that the prosecutor didn’t give one example of a broken fingernail. He just said sources were endangered. Well it’s simply not true.”
    Longtime Assange associate, Joseph Farrell, also spoke to the press:
    Breaking: WikiLeaks spokesperson Joseph Farrell at the recess says the prosecution has proposed a "flat contradiction and a repeat of the Manning trial" pic.twitter.com/S2cS1k0XWj
    — John McEvoy (@jmcevoy_2) February 24, 2020
    11:45 am London time: The formal hearing to determine whether Julian Assange will be extradited to the United States to stand trial on 17 counts of the Espionage Act has begun in London on Monday morning. Assange’s lawyers arrived at Woolwich Crown Court with stacks of evidence that will presented during the first week of the hearing, which will resume in May.
    Julian Assange's legal team bringing in the evidence #Assange #AssangeCase #WikiLeaks @AAPNewswire pic.twitter.com/gF1OCETBQh
    — Marty Silk (@MartySilkHack) February 24, 2020
    Yellow Vests, who’ve traveled to London from Paris to protest outside the courthouse, present a vest to John Shipton to give to his son Julian Assange.
    #GiletsJaunes who have travelled from #Paris give a yellow vest to Julian #Assange. Presenting it to his father before the extradition hearing in #London begins. #FreeAssange#DontExtraditeAssange
    pic.twitter.com/0BVhcH7bu8
    — nonouzi (@Gerrrty) February 24, 2020
    U.S. prosecutors began by arguing that Assange is not a journalist and that he risked the lives of U.S. informants.
    BREAKING: UK/US GOVERNMENT CLAIM ASSANGE IS BEING PURSUED FOR RISKING OR PUBLISHING NAMES OF SOURCES PUTTING THEM AT RISK. "#JULIANASSANGE IS NO JOURNALIST" HE'S NOT CHARGED WITH PUBLISHING EMBARRISING OR AWKWARD INFO@SputnikInt pic.twitter.com/9Qgt8DYPEu
    — M. A. E. (@MElmaazi) February 24, 2020
    Revealing the names of U.S. informants is not a crime and is not listed on Assange’s indictment as a statute U.S. prosecutors are alleging Assange has violated. After more than ten years, there is absolutely no evidence that any informant’s life was harmed by WikiLeaks revelations, said WikiLeaks Editor-in-Chief Kristinn Hrafnsson at a press conference on Wednesday.

    2395

    Tags: John Shipton Joseph Farrell Julian Assange Kristinn Hrafnsson

    (this was all copy/pasted from Consortium News: https://consortiumnews.com/2020/02/2...ition-hearing/)


  22. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Dennis Leahy For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th February 2020), Franny (25th February 2020), Innocent Warrior (25th February 2020), onawah (25th February 2020), Tintin (25th February 2020)

  23. Link to Post #212
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,209
    Thanks
    47,682
    Thanked 116,099 times in 20,640 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    I'm having the same problem--nothing of the text is visible. I'm using Chrome, but I don't Tweet.
    Quote Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
    Quote Posted by Tintin (here)
    Quote Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
    Do we need to have a twitter account to see posts with "tweet" tags? I don't see anything. Thanks, Tintin.
    That's a good question Dennis. And I'm stumped, to be honest. Do you mean you can't access Twitter content via the embedded tweets? (Click within the embeds and that should allow you to go to Twitter). No, you shouldn't need a Twitter account to be able to see that content.

    Probably best we tease this out offline.
    If I quote your post, I can see the tweet tags and the numbers between the tags. But here on the forum, nothing shows up at all (as shown on my post including your quote.) I'm using Firefox latest browser.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  24. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th February 2020), Dennis Leahy (25th February 2020), Franny (10th March 2020), Innocent Warrior (25th February 2020), Tintin (25th February 2020)

  25. Link to Post #213
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,209
    Thanks
    47,682
    Thanked 116,099 times in 20,640 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    Julian Assange Will Face a Show Trial in the United States!- UN Torture Rapporteur Nils Melzer
    Feb 24, 2020
    Going Underground on RT

    "We speak to the UN’s Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer about the persecution of Julian Assange. He discusses the threat Assange’s persecution poses to press freedom, why mainstream media are starting to slowly support the Wikileaks founder, the allegations Julian Assange faced in Sweden, governments not cooperating with him despite his UN mandate and more!"
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  26. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th February 2020), Dennis Leahy (25th February 2020), Deux Corbeaux (25th February 2020), Franny (10th March 2020), Innocent Warrior (25th February 2020), Tintin (25th February 2020)

  27. Link to Post #214
    United States Avalon Member Dennis Leahy's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th January 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Language
    English
    Age
    69
    Posts
    6,741
    Thanks
    47,010
    Thanked 48,583 times in 5,817 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    Snippet of article from: https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/worl...nge-bin-laden/
    Quote Barrister Edward Fitzgerald was asked by District Judge Vanessa Baraitser if Assange would testify during the month-long hearing.

    “Madam, it’s very unlikely that he would,” Mr Fitzgerald said.

    Arguing against extradition, he said the dividing line between US courts and the president has been “blurred” in the decade-long pursuit of his client.

    Mr Fitzgerald told the packed court a witness will confirm the US had even contemplated more “extreme measures” against the Australian.
    “Such as kidnapping or poisoning Julian Assange in the embassy,” he said, referring to Assange’s seven-year asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

    Mr Fitzgerald detailed how the Americans had spied on his meetings with lawyers in the embassy. He also maintained that US congressman Dana Rohrabacher had indeed offered Assange a pardon on orders of President Donald Trump, a claim both American men denied last week.

    “President Trump denies everything and we say ‘well, he would, wouldn’t he’,” Mr Fitzgerald said.

    Outside court, journalists and human rights group said the case could have wide-ranging impacts for media freedoms and whistleblowers.


  28. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Dennis Leahy For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th February 2020), Franny (26th February 2020), Innocent Warrior (25th February 2020), onawah (25th February 2020), Tintin (25th February 2020)

  29. Link to Post #215
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    21st July 2010
    Age
    38
    Posts
    715
    Thanks
    326
    Thanked 3,312 times in 617 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    Another fork in the road: You either support Julian Assange or Donald Trump.

    It is not possible to do both any longer. These two things are antithetical to each other.

    Trump, could, right now as CEO of the United States drop all the charges against Assange and see Julian free which is what should happen.

    Julian Assange does a public service that allows us to know things we wouldnt otherwise. Attacks on journalist and whistleblowers should not be tolerated, ESPECIALLY here at Avalon.

    I for one stand with Julian Assange and hope that others on this board too.

  30. Link to Post #216
    UK Moderator/Librarian/Administrator Tintin's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd June 2017
    Location
    Project Avalon library
    Language
    English
    Age
    54
    Posts
    5,447
    Thanks
    64,676
    Thanked 46,626 times in 5,415 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    (From Craig Murray who has, thankfully for all of us, managed to obtain a seat in the hearing. NB: a correction to my post here - there are sixteen seats, not fourteen as I had originally posted.)

    "There was a separate media entrance and a media room with live transmission from the courtroom, and there were so many scores of media I thought I could relax and not worry as the basic facts would be widely reported. In fact, I could not have been more wrong. I followed the arguments very clearly every minute of the day, and not a single one of the most important facts and arguments today has been reported anywhere in the mainstream media. That is a bold claim, but I fear it is perfectly true. So I have much work to do to let the world know what actually happened. The mere act of being an honest witness is suddenly extremely important, when the entire media has abandoned that role."


    -----------------------------------

    Your Man in the Public Gallery – Assange Hearing Day 1 [February 24th 2020]

    Posted February 25th 2020

    Woolwich Crown Court is designed to impose the power of the state. Normal courts in this country are public buildings, deliberately placed by our ancestors right in the centre of towns, almost always just up a few steps from a main street. The major purpose of their positioning and of their architecture was to facilitate public access in the belief that it is vital that justice can be seen by the public.

    Woolwich Crown Court, which hosts Belmarsh Magistrates Court, is built on totally the opposite principle. It is designed with no other purpose than to exclude the public. Attached to a prison on a windswept marsh far from any normal social centre, an island accessible only through navigating a maze of dual carriageways, the entire location and architecture of the building is predicated on preventing public access. It is surrounded by a continuation of the same extremely heavy duty steel paling barrier that surrounds the prison. It is the most extraordinary thing, a courthouse which is a part of the prison system itself, a place where you are already considered guilty and in jail on arrival. Woolwich Crown Court is nothing but the physical negation of the presumption of innocence, the very incarnation of injustice in unyielding steel, concrete and armoured glass. It has precisely the same relationship to the administration of justice as Guantanamo Bay or the Lubyanka. It is in truth just the sentencing wing of Belmarsh prison.

    When enquiring about facilities for the public to attend the hearing, an Assange activist was told by a member of court staff that we should realise that Woolwich is a “counter-terrorism court”. That is true de facto, but in truth a “counter-terrorism court” is an institution unknown to the UK constitution. Indeed, if a single day at Woolwich Crown Court does not convince you the existence of liberal democracy is now a lie, then your mind must be very closed indeed.

    Extradition hearings are not held at Belmarsh Magistrates Court inside Woolwich Crown Court. They are always held at Westminster Magistrates Court as the application is deemed to be delivered to the government at Westminster. Now get your head around this. This hearing is at Westminster Magistrates Court. It is being held by the Westminster magistrates and Westminster court staff, but located at Belmarsh Magistrates Court inside Woolwich Crown Court. All of which weird convolution is precisely so they can use the “counter-terrorist court” to limit public access and to impose the fear of the power of the state.

    One consequence is that, in the courtroom itself, Julian Assange is confined at the back of the court behind a bulletproof glass screen. He made the point several times during proceedings that this makes it very difficult for him to see and hear the proceedings. The magistrate, Vanessa Baraitser, chose to interpret this with studied dishonesty as a problem caused by the very faint noise of demonstrators outside, as opposed to a problem caused by Assange being locked away from the court in a massive bulletproof glass box.

    Now there is no reason at all for Assange to be in that box, designed to restrain extremely physically violent terrorists. He could sit, as a defendant at a hearing normally would, in the body of the court with his lawyers. But the cowardly and vicious Baraitser has refused repeated and persistent requests from the defence for Assange to be allowed to sit with his lawyers. Baraitser of course is but a puppet, being supervised by Chief Magistrate Lady Arbuthnot, a woman so enmeshed in the defence and security service establishment I can conceive of no way in which her involvement in this case could be more corrupt.

    It does not matter to Baraitser or Arbuthnot if there is any genuine need for Assange to be incarcerated in a bulletproof box, or whether it stops him from following proceedings in court. Baraitser’s intention is to humiliate Assange, and to instill in the rest of us horror at the vast crushing power of the state. The inexorable strength of the sentencing wing of the nightmarish Belmarsh Prison must be maintained. If you are here, you are guilty.

    It’s the Lubyanka. You may only be a remand prisoner. This may only be a hearing not a trial. You may have no history of violence and not be accused of any violence. You may have three of the country’s most eminent psychiatrists submitting reports of your history of severe clinical depression and warning of suicide. But I, Vanessa Baraitser, am still going to lock you up in a box designed for the most violent of terrorists. To show what we can do to dissidents. And if you can’t then follow court proceedings, all the better.

    You will perhaps better accept what I say about the Court when I tell you that, for a hearing being followed all round the world, they have brought it to a courtroom which had a total number of sixteen seats available to members of the public. 16. To make sure I got one of those 16 and could be your man in the gallery, I was outside that great locked iron fence queuing in the cold, wet and wind from 6am. At 8am the gate was unlocked, and I was able to walk inside the fence to another queue before the doors of the courtroom, where despite the fact notices clearly state the court opens to the public at 8am, I had to queue outside the building again for another hour and forty minutes. Then I was processed through armoured airlock doors, through airport type security, and had to queue behind two further locked doors, before finally getting to my seat just as the court started at 10am. By which stage the intention was we should have been thoroughly cowed and intimidated, not to mention drenched and potentially hypothermic.

    There was a separate media entrance and a media room with live transmission from the courtroom, and there were so many scores of media I thought I could relax and not worry as the basic facts would be widely reported. In fact, I could not have been more wrong. I followed the arguments very clearly every minute of the day, and not a single one of the most important facts and arguments today has been reported anywhere in the mainstream media. That is a bold claim, but I fear it is perfectly true. So I have much work to do to let the world know what actually happened. The mere act of being an honest witness is suddenly extremely important, when the entire media has abandoned that role.

    James Lewis QC made the opening statement for the prosecution. It consisted of two parts, both equally extraordinary. The first and longest part was truly remarkable for containing no legal argument, and for being addressed not to the magistrate but to the media. It is not just that it was obvious that is where his remarks were aimed, he actually stated on two occasions during his opening statement that he was addressing the media, once repeating a sentence and saying specifically that he was repeating it again because it was important that the media got it.

    I am frankly astonished that Baraitser allowed this. It is completely out of order for a counsel to address remarks not to the court but to the media, and there simply could not be any clearer evidence that this is a political show trial and that Baraitser is complicit in that. I have not the slightest doubt that the defence would have been pulled up extremely quickly had they started addressing remarks to the media. Baraitser makes zero pretence of being anything other than in thrall to the Crown, and by extension to the US Government.

    The points which Lewis wished the media to know were these: it is not true that mainstream outlets like the Guardian and New York Times are also threatened by the charges against Assange, because Assange was not charged with publishing the cables but only with publishing the names of informants, and with cultivating Manning and assisting him to attempt computer hacking. Only Assange had done these things, not mainstream outlets.

    Lewis then proceeded to read out a series of articles from the mainstream media attacking Assange, as evidence that the media and Assange were not in the same boat. The entire opening hour consisted of the prosecution addressing the media, attempting to drive a clear wedge between the media and Wikileaks and thus aimed at reducing media support for Assange. It was a political address, not remotely a legal submission. At the same time, the prosecution had prepared reams of copies of this section of Lewis’ address, which were handed out to the media and given them electronically so they could cut and paste.

    Following an adjournment, magistrate Baraitser questioned the prosecution on the veracity of some of these claims. In particular, the claim that newspapers were not in the same position because Assange was charged not with publication, but with “aiding and abetting” Chelsea Manning in getting the material, did not seem consistent with Lewis’ reading of the 1989 Official Secrets Act, which said that merely obtaining and publishing any government secret was an offence. Surely, Baraitser suggested, that meant that newspapers just publishing the Manning leaks would be guilty of an offence?

    This appeared to catch Lewis entirely off guard. The last thing he had expected was any perspicacity from Baraitser, whose job was just to do what he said. Lewis hummed and hawed, put his glasses on and off several times, adjusted his microphone repeatedly and picked up a succession of pieces of paper from his brief, each of which appeared to surprise him by its contents, as he waved them haplessly in the air and said he really should have cited the Shayler case but couldn’t find it. It was liking watching Columbo with none of the charm and without the killer question at the end of the process.

    Suddenly Lewis appeared to come to a decision. Yes, he said much more firmly. The 1989 Official Secrets Act had been introduced by the Thatcher Government after the Ponting Case, specifically to remove the public interest defence and to make unauthorised possession of an official secret a crime of strict liability – meaning no matter how you got it, publishing and even possessing made you guilty. Therefore, under the principle of dual criminality, Assange was liable for extradition whether or not he had aided and abetted Manning. Lewis then went on to add that any journalist and any publication that printed the official secret would therefore also be committing an offence, no matter how they had obtained it, and no matter if it did or did not name informants.

    Lewis had thus just flat out contradicted his entire opening statement to the media stating that they need not worry as the Assange charges could never be applied to them. And he did so straight after the adjournment, immediately after his team had handed out copies of the argument he had now just completely contradicted. I cannot think it has often happened in court that a senior lawyer has proven himself so absolutely and so immediately to be an unmitigated and ill-motivated liar. This was undoubtedly the most breathtaking moment in today’s court hearing.

    Yet remarkably I cannot find any mention anywhere in the mainstream media that this happened at all. What I can find, everywhere, is the mainstream media reporting, via cut and paste, Lewis’s first part of his statement on why the prosecution of Assange is not a threat to press freedom; but nobody seems to have reported that he totally abandoned his own argument five minutes later. Were the journalists too stupid to understand the exchanges?

    The explanation is very simple. The clarification coming from a question Baraitser asked Lewis, there is no printed or electronic record of Lewis’ reply. His original statement was provided in cut and paste format to the media. His contradiction of it would require a journalist to listen to what was said in court, understand it and write it down. There is no significant percentage of mainstream media journalists who command that elementary ability nowadays. “Journalism” consists of cut and paste of approved sources only. Lewis could have stabbed Assange to death in the courtroom, and it would not be reported unless contained in a government press release.

    I was left uncertain of Baraitser’s purpose in this. Plainly she discomfited Lewis very badly on this point, and appeared rather to enjoy doing so. On the other hand the point she made is not necessarily helpful to the defence. What she was saying was essentially that Julian could be extradited under dual criminality, from the UK point of view, just for publishing, whether or not he conspired with Chelsea Manning, and that all the journalists who published could be charged too. But surely this is a point so extreme that it would be bound to be invalid under the Human Rights Act? Was she pushing Lewis to articulate a position so extreme as to be untenable – giving him enough rope to hang himself – or was she slavering at the prospect of not just extraditing Assange, but of mass prosecutions of journalists?

    The reaction of one group was very interesting. The four US government lawyers seated immediately behind Lewis had the grace to look very uncomfortable indeed as Lewis baldly declared that any journalist and any newspaper or broadcast media publishing or even possessing any government secret was committing a serious offence. Their entire strategy had been to pretend not to be saying that.

    Lewis then moved on to conclude the prosecution’s arguments. The court had no decision to make, he stated. Assange must be extradited. The offence met the test of dual criminality as it was an offence both in the USA and UK. UK extradition law specifically barred the court from testing whether there was any evidence to back up the charges. If there had been, as the defence argued, abuse of process, the court must still extradite and then the court must pursue the abuse of process as a separate matter against the abusers. (This is a particularly specious argument as it is not possible for the court to take action against the US government due to sovereign immunity, as Lewis well knows). Finally, Lewis stated that the Human Rights Act and freedom of speech were completely irrelevant in extradition proceedings.

    Edward Fitzgerald then arose to make the opening statement for the defence. He started by stating that the motive for the prosecution was entirely political, and that political offences were specifically excluded under article 4.1 of the UK/US extradition treaty. He pointed out that at the time of the Chelsea Manning Trial and again in 2013 the Obama administration had taken specific decisions not to prosecute Assange for the Manning leaks. This had been reversed by the Trump administration for reasons that were entirely political.

    On abuse of process, Fitzgerald referred to evidence presented to the Spanish criminal courts that the CIA had commissioned a Spanish security company to spy on Julian Assange in the Embassy, and that this spying specifically included surveillance of Assange’s privileged meetings with his lawyers to discuss extradition. For the state trying to extradite to spy on the defendant’s client-lawyer consultations is in itself grounds to dismiss the case. (This point is undoubtedly true. Any decent judge would throw the case out summarily for the outrageous spying on the defence lawyers).

    Fitzgerald went on to say the defence would produce evidence the CIA not only spied on Assange and his lawyers, but actively considered kidnapping or poisoning him, and that this showed there was no commitment to proper rule of law in this case.

    Fitzgerald said that the prosecution’s framing of the case contained deliberate misrepresentation of the facts that also amounted to abuse of process. It was not true that there was any evidence of harm to informants, and the US government had confirmed this in other fora, eg in Chelsea Manning’s trial. There had been no conspiracy to hack computers, and Chelsea Manning had been acquitted on that charge at court martial. Lastly it was untrue that Wikileaks had initiated publication of unredacted names of informants, as other media organisations had been responsible for this first.

    Again, so far as I can see, while the US allegation of harm to informants is widely reported, the defence’s total refutation on the facts and claim that the fabrication of facts amounts to abuse of process is not much reported at all. Fitzgerald finally referred to US prison conditions, the impossibility of a fair trial in the US, and the fact the Trump Administration has stated foreign nationals will not receive First Amendment protections, as reasons that extradition must be barred. You can read the whole defence statement, but in my view the strongest passage was on why this is a political prosecution, and thus precluded from extradition.

    For the purposes of section 81(a), I next have to deal with the question of how
    this politically motivated prosecution satisfies the test of being directed against
    Julian Assange because of his political opinions. The essence of his political
    opinions which have provoked this prosecution are summarised in the reports
    of Professor Feldstein [tab 18], Professor Rogers [tab 40], Professor Noam
    Chomsky [tab 39] and Professor Kopelman:-
    i. He is a leading proponent of an open society and of freedom of expression.
    ii. He is anti-war and anti-imperialism.
    iii. He is a world-renowned champion of political transparency and of the
    public’s right to access information on issues of importance – issues such
    as political corruption, war crimes, torture and the mistreatment of
    Guantanamo detainees.
    5.4.Those beliefs and those actions inevitably bring him into conflict with powerful
    states including the current US administration, for political reasons. Which
    explains why he has been denounced as a terrorist and why President Trump
    has in the past called for the death penalty.

    5.5.But I should add his revelations are far from confined to the wrongdoings of
    the US. He has exposed surveillance by Russia; and published exposes of Mr
    Assad in Syria; and it is said that WikiLeaks revelations about corruption in
    Tunisia and torture in Egypt were the catalyst for the Arab Spring itself.

    5.6.The US say he is no journalist. But you will see a full record of his work in
    Bundle M. He has been a member of the Australian journalists union since
    2009, he is a member of the NUJ and the European Federation of Journalists.
    He has won numerous media awards including being honoured with the
    highest award for Australian journalists.

    His work has been recognised by the Economist, Amnesty International and the Council of Europe. He is the winner of the Martha Gelhorn prize and has been repeatedly nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, including both last year and this year. You can see from the materials that he has written books, articles and documentaries. He has had articles published in the Guardian, the New York Times, the Washington Post and the New Statesman, just to name a few.

    Some of the very publications for which his extradition is being sought have been refereed to and relied upon in Courts throughout the world, including the UK Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights. In short, he has championed the cause of transparency and freedom of information throughout the world.

    5.7.Professor Noam Chomsky puts it like this: – ‘in courageously upholding
    political beliefs that most of profess to share he has performed an
    enormous service to all those in the world who treasure the values of
    freedom and democracy and who therefore demand the right to know
    what their elected representatives are doing
    ’ [see tab 39, paragraph 14].

    So Julian Assange’s positive impact on the world is undeniable.

    The hostility it has provoked from the Trump administration is equally undeniable.

    The legal test for ‘political opinions’ 5.8.I am sure you are aware of the legal authorities on this issue: namely whether a request is made because of the defendant’s political opinions.

    A broad approach has to be adopted when applying the test. In support of this we rely on the case of Re Asliturk [2002] EWHC 2326 (abuse authorities, tab 11, at
    paras 25 – 26) which clearly establishes that such a wide approach should be
    adopted to the concept of political opinions. And that will clearly cover Julian
    Assange’s ideological positions.

    Moreover, we also rely on cases such as Emilia Gomez v SSHD [2000] INLR 549 at tab 43 of the political offence authorities bundle. These show that the concept of “political opinions” extends to the political opinions imputed to the individual citizen by the state which prosecutes him. For that reason the characterisation of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks as a “non-state hostile intelligence agency” by Mr Pompeo makes clear that he has been targeted for his imputed political opinions.

    All the experts whose reports you have show that Julian Assange has been targeted
    because of the political position imputed to him by the Trump administration –
    as an enemy of America who must be brought down.


    Tomorrow the defence continue. I am genuinely uncertain what will happen as I feel at the moment far too exhausted to be there at 6am to queue to get in. But I hope somehow I will contrive another report tomorrow evening.

    With grateful thanks to those who donated or subscribed to make this reporting possible.

    This article is entirely free to reproduce and publish, including in translation, and I very much hope people will do so actively. Truth shall set us free.
    “If a man does not keep pace with [fall into line with] his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” - Thoreau

  31. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th February 2020), Brightstar (27th February 2020), Clear Light (25th February 2020), Dennis Leahy (25th February 2020), Franny (26th February 2020), Hym (25th February 2020), Icare (1st March 2020), Innocent Warrior (25th February 2020), mountain_jim (29th February 2020), onawah (25th February 2020), RogeRio (1st March 2020), Sarah Rainsong (26th February 2020), Satori (26th February 2020)

  32. Link to Post #217
    Australia On Sabbatical
    Join Date
    30th October 2014
    Location
    Great Northern Hotel, Twin Peaks.
    Posts
    3,798
    Thanks
    27,109
    Thanked 29,551 times in 3,482 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases





    The page dedicated to documenting the first part of the extradition hearing, day by day, with relevant links, images, and other useful information -
    https://challengepower.info/usa_vs_j...rt_1_24-28_feb

    *****



    Link to PDF HERE.

    *****







    *****





    Julian Assange’s lawyer claims US wanted to kill WikiLeaks founder and make it look like accident (New York Post, Feb 25)
    Never give up on your silly, silly dreams.

    You mustn't be afraid to dream a little BIGGER, darling.

  33. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Innocent Warrior For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (29th February 2020), Dennis Leahy (25th February 2020), Franny (26th February 2020), Icare (1st March 2020), jaybee (2nd March 2020), justntime2learn (25th February 2020), Mac (25th February 2020), mountain_jim (29th February 2020), onawah (25th February 2020), Pam (26th February 2020), RogeRio (1st March 2020), Satori (26th February 2020), Tintin (26th February 2020)

  34. Link to Post #218
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,209
    Thanks
    47,682
    Thanked 116,099 times in 20,640 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    WikiLeaks – public enemy Julian Assange | DW Documentary
    Feb 25, 2020
    DW Documentary
    1.28M subscribers

    "The Wikileaks revelations shocked the world, and co-founder Julian Assange shot to fame. WikiLeaks exposed U.S. army war crimes, the secret emails of top international politicians and controversial secret service surveillance methods.

    Assange’s relentless pursuit of total transparency has changed the face of journalism and given rise to much imitation, as well as fierce criticism.

    But it seems the spell has broken. After spending seven years in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, Julian Assange is now in a cell at Belmarsh, a maximum-security prison in London. In many ways, he is being treated as a terrorist. His health has suffered. The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer has even referred to a "murderous system” designed to make an example of Assange.

    Assange took on a very powerful opponent. The U.S.A. is pressing charges for obtaining and disclosing classified information. Now, the extradition hearing is about to begin in London. If Assange is extradited from England to the U.S.A., he faces up to 175 years in jail for espionage. Experts are expecting one of the most significant trials of its kind to date.

    "WikiLeaks - Public Enemy Julian Assange” is a detailed depiction of the rise and fall of Julian Assange. The film reveals some personal glimpses into different aspects of the story: meetings with Assange’s worried father, talks with high-ranking U.S. officials, an exclusive interview with whistleblower Edward Snowden. And every time the key question re-emerges: Is Julian Assange a journalist or a spy?"

    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  35. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (29th February 2020), Dennis Leahy (26th February 2020), East Sun (26th February 2020), Franny (26th February 2020), Icare (1st March 2020), Innocent Warrior (28th February 2020), mountain_jim (29th February 2020), Pam (26th February 2020), Tintin (26th February 2020)

  36. Link to Post #219
    UK Moderator/Librarian/Administrator Tintin's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd June 2017
    Location
    Project Avalon library
    Language
    English
    Age
    54
    Posts
    5,447
    Thanks
    64,676
    Thanked 46,626 times in 5,415 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    "Day 2 proceedings had started with a statement from Edward Fitzgerald, Assange’s QC, that shook us rudely into life. He stated that yesterday, on the first day of trial, Julian had twice been stripped naked and searched, eleven times been handcuffed, and five times been locked up in different holding cells. On top of this, all of his court documents had been taken from him by the prison authorities, including privileged communications between his lawyers and himself, and he had been left with no ability to prepare to participate in today’s proceedings."
    Your Man in the Public Gallery – Assange Hearing Day 2
    By Craig Murray

    This afternoon Julian’s Spanish lawyer, Baltasar Garzon, left court to return to Madrid. On the way out he naturally stopped to shake hands with his client, proffering his fingers through the narrow slit in the bulletproof glass cage. Assange half stood to take his lawyer’s hand. The two security guards in the cage with Assange immediately sprang up, putting hands on Julian and forcing him to sit down, preventing the handshake.

    That was not by any means the worst thing today, but it is a striking image of the senseless brute force continually used against a man accused of publishing documents. That a man cannot even shake his lawyer’s hand goodbye is against the entire spirit in which the members of the legal system like to pretend the law is practised. I offer that startling moment as encapsulating yesterday’s events in court.

    Day 2 proceedings had started with a statement from Edward Fitzgerald, Assange’s QC, that shook us rudely into life. He stated that yesterday, on the first day of trial, Julian had twice been stripped naked and searched, eleven times been handcuffed, and five times been locked up in different holding cells. On top of this, all of his court documents had been taken from him by the prison authorities, including privileged communications between his lawyers and himself, and he had been left with no ability to prepare to participate in today’s proceedings.

    Magistrate Baraitser looked at Fitzgerald and stated, in a voice laced with disdain, that he had raised such matters before and she had always replied that she had no jurisdiction over the prison estate. He should take it up with the prison authorities. Fitzgerald remained on his feet, which drew a very definite scowl from Baraitser, and replied that of course they would do that again, but this repeated behaviour by the prison authorities threatened the ability of the defence to prepare. He added that regardless of jurisdiction, in his experience it was common practice for magistrates and judges to pass on comments and requests to the prison service where the conduct of the trial was affected, and that jails normally listened to magistrates sympathetically.

    Baraitser flat-out denied any knowledge of such a practice, and stated that Fitzgerald should present her with written arguments setting out the case law on jurisdiction over prison conditions. This was too much even for prosecution counsel James Lewis, who stood up to say the prosecution would also want Assange to have a fair hearing, and that he could confirm that what the defence were suggesting was normal practice. Even then, Baraitser still refused to intervene with the prison. She stated that if the prison conditions were so bad as to reach the very high bar of making a fair hearing impossible, the defence should bring a motion to dismiss the charges on those grounds. Otherwise they should drop it.

    Both prosecution and defence seemed surprised by Baraitser’s claim that she had not heard of what they both referred to as common practice. Lewis may have been genuinely concerned at the shocking description of Assange’s prison treatment yesterday; or he may have just had warning klaxons going off in his head screaming “mistrial”. But the net result is Baraitser will attempt to do nothing to prevent Julian’s physical and mental abuse in jail nor to try to give him the ability to participate in his defence. The only realistic explanation that occurs to me is that Baraitser has been warned off, because this continual mistreatment and confiscation of documents is on senior government authority.

    A last small incident for me to recount: having queued again from the early hours, I was at the final queue before the entrance to the public gallery, when the name was called out of Kristin Hrnafsson, editor of Wikileaks, with whom I was talking at the time. Kristin identified himself, and was told by the court official he was barred from the public gallery.

    Now I was with Kristin throughout the entire proceedings the previous day, and he had done absolutely nothing amiss – he is rather a quiet gentleman. When he was called for, it was by name and by job description – they were specifically banning the editor of Wikileaks from the trial. Kristin asked why and was told it was a decision of the Court.

    At this stage John Shipton, Julian’s father, announced that in this case the family members would all leave too, and they did so, walking out of the building. They and others then started tweeting the news of the family walkout. This appeared to cause some consternation among court officials, and fifteen minutes later Kristin was re-admitted. We still have no idea what lay behind this. Later in the day journalists were being briefed by officials it was simply over queue-jumping, but that seems improbable as he was removed by staff who called him by name and title, rather than had spotted him as a queue-jumper.

    None of the above goes to the official matter of the case. All of the above tells you more about the draconian nature of the political show-trial which is taking place than does the charade being enacted in the body of the court. There were moments today when I got drawn in to the court process and achieved the suspension of disbelief you might do in theatre, and began thinking “Wow, this case is going well for Assange”. Then an event such as those recounted above kicks in, a coldness grips your heart, and you recall there is no jury here to be convinced. I simply do not believe that anything said or proved in the courtroom can have an impact on the final verdict of this court.

    So to the actual proceedings in the case.

    For the defence, Mark Summers QC stated that the USA charges were entirely dependent on three factual accusations of Assange behviour:

    1) Assange helped Manning to decode a hash key to access classified material.
    Summers stated this was a provably false allegation from the evidence of the Manning court-martial.

    2) Assange solicited the material from Manning
    Summers stated this was provably wrong from information available to the public

    3) Assange knowingly put lives at risk
    Summers stated this was provably wrong both from publicly available information and from specific involvement of the US government.

    In summary, Summers stated the US government knew that the allegations being made were false as to fact, and they were demonstrably made in bad faith. This was therefore an abuse of process which should lead to dismissal of the extradition request. He described the above three counts as “rubbish, rubbish and rubbish”.

    Summers then walked through the facts of the case. He said the charges from the USA divide the materials leaked by Manning to Wikileaks into three categories:

    a) Diplomatic Cables
    b) Guantanamo detainee assessment briefs
    c) Iraq War rules of engagement
    d) Afghan and Iraqi war logs

    Summers then methodically went through a), b), c) and d) relating each in turn to alleged behaviours 1), 2) and 3), making twelve counts of explanation and exposition in all. This comprehensive account took some four hours and I shall not attempt to capture it here. I will rather give highlights, but will relate occasionally to the alleged behaviour number and/or the alleged materials letter. I hope you follow that – it took me some time to do so!

    On 1) Summers at great length demonstrated conclusively that Manning had access to each material a) b) c) d) provided to Wikileaks without needing any code from Assange, and had that access before ever contacting Assange. Nor had Manning needed a code to conceal her identity as the prosecution alleged – the database for intelligence analysts Manning could access – as could thousands of others – did not require a username or password to access it from a work military computer. Summers quoted testimony of several officers from Manning’s court-martial to confirm this. Nor would breaking the systems admin code on the system give Manning access to any additional classified databases.

    Summers quoted evidence from the Manning court-martial, where this had been accepted, that the reason Manning wanted to get in to systems admin was to allow soldiers to put their video-games and movies on their government laptops, which in fact happened frequently.

    Magistrate Baraitser twice made major interruptions. She observed that if Chelsea Manning did not know she could not be traced as the user who downloaded the databases, she might have sought Assange’s assistance to crack a code to conceal her identity from ignorance she did not need to do that, and to assist would still be an offence by Assange.

    Summers pointed out that Manning knew that she did not need a username and password, because she actually accessed all the materials without one. Baraitser replied that this did not constitute proof she knew she could not be traced. Summers said in logic it made no sense to argue that she was seeking a code to conceal her user ID and password, where there was no user ID and password. Baraitser replied again he could not prove that. At this point Summers became somewhat testy and short with Baraitser, and took her through the court martial evidence again. Of which more…

    Baraitser also made the point that even if Assange were helping Manning to crack an admin code, even if it did not enable Manning to access any more databases, that still was unauthorised use and would constitute the crime of aiding and abetting computer misuse, even if for an innocent purpose.

    After a brief break, Baraitser came back with a real zinger. She told Summers that he had presented the findings of the US court martial of Chelsea Manning as fact. But she did not agree that her court had to treat evidence at a US court martial, even agreed or uncontested evidence or prosecution evidence, as fact. Summers replied that agreed evidence or prosecution evidence at the US court martial clearly was agreed by the US government as fact, and what was at issue at the moment was whether the US government was charging contrary to the facts it knew. Baraitser said she would return to her point once witnesses were heard.

    Baraitser was no making no attempt to conceal a hostility to the defence argument, and seemed irritated they had the temerity to make it. This burst out when discussing c), the Iraq war rules of engagement. Summers argued that these had not been solicited from Manning, but had rather been provided by Manning in an accompanying file along with the Collateral Murder video that showed the murder of Reuters journalists and children. Manning’s purpose, as she stated at her court martial, was to show that the Collateral Murder actions breached the rules of engagement, even though the Department of Defense claimed otherwise. Summers stated that by not including this context, the US extradition request was deliberately misleading as it did not even mention the Collateral Murder video at all.

    At this point Baraitser could not conceal her contempt. Try to imagine Lady Bracknell saying “A Handbag” or “the Brighton line”, or if your education didn’t run that way try to imagine Pritti Patel spotting a disabled immigrant. This is a literal quote:
    “Are you suggesting, Mr Summers, that the authorities, the Government, should have to provide context for its charges?”
    An unfazed Summers replied in the affirmative and then went on to show where the Supreme Court had said so in other extradition cases. Baraitser was showing utter confusion that anybody could claim a significant distinction between the Government and God.

    The bulk of Summers’ argument went to refuting behaviour 3), putting lives at risk. This was only claimed in relation to materials a) and d). Summers described at great length the efforts of Wikileaks with media partners over more than a year to set up a massive redaction campaign on the cables. He explained that the unredacted cables only became available after Luke Harding and David Leigh of the Guardian published the password to the cache as the heading to Chapter XI of their book Wikileaks, published in February 2011.

    Nobody had put 2 and 2 together on this password until the German publication Die Freitag had done so and announced it had the unredacted cables in August 2011. Summers then gave the most powerful arguments of the day.

    The US government had been actively participating in the redaction exercise on the cables. They therefore knew the allegations of reckless publication to be untrue.

    Once Die Freitag announced they had the unredacted materials, Julian Assange and Sara Harrison instantly telephoned the White House, State Department and US Embassy to warn them named sources may be put at risk. Summers read from the transcripts of telephone conversations as Assange and Harrison attempted to convince US officials of the urgency of enabling source protection procedures – and expressed their bafflement as officials stonewalled them. This evidence utterly undermined the US government’s case and proved bad faith in omitting extremely relevant fact. It was a very striking moment.

    With relation to the same behaviour 3) on materials d), Summers showed that the Manning court martial had accepted these materials contained no endangered source names, but showed that Wikileaks had activated a redaction exercise anyway as a “belt and braces” approach.

    There was much more from the defence. For the prosecution, James Lewis indicated he would reply in depth later in proceedings, but wished to state that the prosecution does not accept the court martial evidence as fact, and particularly does not accept any of the “self-serving” testimony of Chelsea Manning, whom he portrayed as a convicted criminal falsely claiming noble motives. The prosecution generally rejected any notion that this court should consider the truth or otherwise of any of the facts; those could only be decided at trial in the USA.

    Then, to wrap up proceedings, Baraitser dropped a massive bombshell. She stated that although Article 4.1 of the US/UK Extradition Treaty forbade political extraditions, this was only in the Treaty. That exemption does not appear in the UK Extradition Act. On the face of it therefore political extradition is not illegal in the UK, as the Treaty has no legal force on the Court. She invited the defence to address this argument in the morning.

    It is now 06.35am and I am late to start queuing…

    With grateful thanks to those who donated or subscribed to make this reporting possible.

    This article is entirely free to reproduce and publish, including in translation, and I very much hope people will do so actively. Truth shall set us free.

    ---------------

    EDITED: Craig Murray comments from outside Belmarsh Prison, day 3 (February 26th).
    'Why would any country sign and ratify any treaty with the UK if the UK can simply say it doesn't apply even though we signed it.'
    Last edited by Tintin; 26th February 2020 at 16:20.
    “If a man does not keep pace with [fall into line with] his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” - Thoreau

  37. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (29th February 2020), Dennis Leahy (26th February 2020), Franny (26th February 2020), Icare (1st March 2020), Innocent Warrior (28th February 2020), mountain_jim (29th February 2020), onawah (26th February 2020), Pam (26th February 2020), RogeRio (1st March 2020), Satori (26th February 2020)

  38. Link to Post #220
    UK Moderator/Librarian/Administrator Tintin's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd June 2017
    Location
    Project Avalon library
    Language
    English
    Age
    54
    Posts
    5,447
    Thanks
    64,676
    Thanked 46,626 times in 5,415 posts

    Default Re: Current Wikileaks and Assange News & Releases

    [BRIEF LIBRARY UPDATE NOTE]

    Just a reminder for anybody who has been following Wikileaks over the years that there is a fairly comprehensive one-stop shop that contains a more or less complete history, in the library: it is pretty extensive.

    Periodic updates are being made as well relating to the historic developments concerning Julian and his recent travails, and Wikileaks in general.

    http://avalonlibrary.net/Julian_Assange_and_Wikileaks/
    “If a man does not keep pace with [fall into line with] his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” - Thoreau

  39. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (29th February 2020), Dennis Leahy (26th February 2020), Franny (26th February 2020), Innocent Warrior (28th February 2020), mountain_jim (29th February 2020), onawah (26th February 2020), Pam (26th February 2020), Satori (26th February 2020)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 31 FirstFirst 1 11 21 31 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts