Streamed live on Sep 15, 2014
Posts tagged ‘Julian Assange’
Kinda my top 5 Whistleblowers List
(note : names are links to persons Wiki page)
a lonely warrior of truth
18 years in Jail for exposing the Israeli Nukes program at Dimona .
fighting uphill for 9/11 truth
A former CIA asset who claims that parts of the US Government did had foreknowledge about the 9/11 attacks .
Soldier with a concience
Deprived of his social life, J. Assange is in hiding from Uk and Swedish Authorities in the Ecuadorian embassy in London for 3 whole years now .
Pvt. Manning got sentenced to a total of 35 years for handling over things like the video below .
a logical 3. truth on 9/11
Currently in hiding, D. Khalezov 9/11 Truther and former Soviet nuclear military asset explains us how 180 000 tons of steel can be transformed (in just 12 seconds) into microscopic dust + more .
Godfather of leaks and burglar for truth ?
NSA, Prism, spying . you name it .
seems like Edward and his Collaborators are the Persons of the hour .
As a journalist I have spent the last four months with NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden and arrived in Germany over the weekend. I worked in Hong Kong as part of the WikiLeaks team that brokered a number of asylum offers for Snowden and negotiated his safe exit from Hong Kong to take up his legal right to seek asylum. I was travelling with him on our way to Latin America when the United States revoked his passport, stranding him in Russia. For the next 39 days I remained with him in the transit zone of Moscow’s Sheremetyevo airport, where I assisted in his legal application to 21 countries for asylum, including Germany, successfully securing his asylum in Russia despite substantial pressure by the United States. I then remained with him until our team was confident that he had established himself and was free from the interference of any government.
Whilst Edward Snowden is safe and protected until his asylum visa is due to be renewed in nine months’ time, there is still much work to be done. The battle Snowden joined against state surveillance and for government transparency is one that WikiLeaks – and many others – have been fighting, and will continue to fight.
WikiLeaks’ battles are many: we fight against unaccountable power and government secrecy, publishing analysis and documents for all affected and to forever provide the public with the history that is theirs. For this, we are fighting legal cases in many jurisdictions and face an unprecedented Grand Jury investigation in the United States. WikiLeaks continues to fight for the protection of sources. We have won the battle for Snowden’s immediate future, but the broader war continues.
Already, in the few days I have spent in Germany, it is heartening to see the people joining together and calling for their government to do what must be done – to investigate NSA spying revelations, and to offer Edward Snowden asylum. The United States should no longer be able to continue spying on every person around the globe, or persecuting those that speak the truth.
Snowden is currently safe in Russia, but there are whistleblowers and sources to whom this does not apply. Chelsea Manning has been subject to abusive treatment by the United States government and is currently serving a 35-year sentence for exposing the true nature of war. Jeremy Hammond is facing a decade in a New York jail for allegedly providing journalists with documents that exposed corporate surveillance. I hope I have shown a counter example: with the right assistance whistleblowers can speak the truth and keep their liberty.
Aggressive tactics are being used against journalists, publishers and experts who work so courageously to bring truth to the world. Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras and Jacob Appelbaum are all in effective exile. Barrett Brown is indicted for reporting on unethical surveillance practices. My editor Julian Assange has asylum over US threats, but the United Kingdom refuses to allow him to fully exercise this right, violating the law. The UK government also detained David Miranda under the UK Terrorism Act for collaborating with Laura Poitras and Glenn Greenwald.
The UK Terrorism Act defines terrorism as the action or threat of action “designed to influence” any government “for the purpose of promoting a political or ideological cause”. It prescribes actions that interfere with the functioning of an “electronic system” (i.e. the NSA’s bulk spying program) or which the government alleges create a “risk” to a section of the public. It should be fanciful to suggest that national security journalism which has the purpose of producing honest government or enforcing basic privacy rights should be called “terrorism”, but that is how the UK is choosing to interpret this law. Almost every story published on the GCHQ and NSA bulk spying programs falls under the UK government’s interpretation of the word “terrorism”. In response, our lawyers have advised me that it is not safe to return home.
The job of the press is to speak truth to power. And yet for doing our job we are persecuted. I say that these aggressive and illegal tactics to silence us – inventing arbitrary legal interpretations, over-zealous charges and disproportionate sentences – must not be permitted to succeed. I stand in solidarity with all those intimidated and persecuted for bringing the truth to the public.
In these times of secrecy and abuse of power there is only one solution – transparency. If our governments are so compromised that they will not tell us the truth, then we must step forward to grasp it. Provided with the unequivocal proof of primary source documents people can fight back. If our governments will not give this information to us, then we must take it for ourselves.
When whistleblowers come forward we need to fight for them, so others will be encouraged. When they are gagged, we must be their voice. When they are hunted, we must be their shield. When they are locked away, we must free them. Giving us the truth is not a crime. This is our data, our information, our history. We must fight to own it.
Courage is contagious.
Sarah Harrison, Wednesday 6 November 2013, Berlin
The United States would paint itself as a promoter of human rights, but any right to make that claim is long gone
Ecuador has now made its decision: to grant political asylum to Julian Assange. This comes in the wake of an incident that should dispel remaining doubts about the motives behind the UK/Swedish attempts to extradite WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. On Wednesday, the UK government made an unprecedented threat to invade Ecuador’s embassy if Assange is not handed over. Such an assault would be so extreme in violating international law and diplomatic conventions that it is difficult to even find an example of a democratic government even making such a threat, let alone carrying it out.
When Ecuadorian foreign minister Ricardo Patiño, in an angry and defiant response, released the written threats to the public, the UK government tried to backtrack and say it wasn’t a threat to invade the embassy (which is another country’s sovereign territory). But what else can we possibly make of this wording from a letter delivered by a British official?
“You need to be aware that there is a legal base in the UK, the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987, that would allow us to take actions in order to arrest Mr Assange in the current premises of the embassy. We sincerely hope that we do not reach that point, but if you are not capable of resolving this matter of Mr Assange’s presence in your premises, this is an open option for us.”
Is there anyone in their right mind who believes that the UK government would make such an unprecedented threat if this were just about an ordinary foreign citizen wanted for questioning – not criminal charges or a trial – by a foreign government?
Ecuador’s decision to grant political asylum to Assange was both predictable and reasonable. But it is also a ground-breaking case that has considerable historic significance.
First, the merits of the case: Assange clearly has a well-founded fear of persecution if he were to be extradited to Sweden. It is pretty much acknowledged that he would be immediately thrown in jail. Since he is not charged with any crime, and the Swedish government has no legitimate reason to bring him to Sweden, this by itself is a form of persecution.
We can infer that the Swedes have no legitimate reason for the extradition, since they were repeatedly offered the opportunity to question him in the UK, but rejected it, and have also refused to even put forth a reason for this refusal. A few weeks ago the Ecuadorian government offered to allow Assange to be questioned in its London embassy, where Assange has been residing since 19 June, but the Swedish government refused – again without offering a reason. This was an act of bad faith in the negotiating process that has taken place between governments to resolve the situation.
Former Stockholm chief district prosecutor Sven-Erik Alhem also made it clear that the Swedish government had no legitimate reason to seek Assange’s extradition when he testified that the decision of the Swedish government to extradite Assange is “unreasonable and unprofessional, as well as unfair and disproportionate“, because he could be easily questioned in the UK.
But, most importantly, the government of Ecuador agreed with Assange that he had a reasonable fear of a second extradition to the United States, and persecution here for his activities as a journalist. The evidence for this was strong. Some examples: an ongoing investigation of Assange and WikiLeaks in the US; evidence that an indictment had already been prepared; statements by important public officials such as Democratic senator Diane Feinstein that he should be prosecuted for espionage, which carries a potential death penalty or life imprisonment.
Why is this case so significant? It is probably the first time that a citizen fleeing political persecution by the US has been granted political asylum by a democratic government seeking to uphold international human rights conventions. This is a pretty big deal, because for more than 60 years the US has portrayed itself as a proponent of human rights internationally – especially during the cold war. And many people have sought and received asylum in the US.
The idea of the US government as a human rights defender, which was believed mostly in the US and allied countries, was premised on a disregard for the human rights of the victims of US wars and foreign policy, such as the 3 million Vietnamese or more than one million Iraqis who were killed, and millions of others displaced, wounded, or abused because of US actions. That idea – that the US should be judged only on what it does within its borders – is losing support as the world grows more multipolar economically and politically, Washington loses power and influence, and its wars, invasions, and occupations are seen by fewer people as legitimate.
At the same time, over the past decade, the US’s own human rights situation has deteriorated. Of course prior to the civil rights legislation of the 1960s, millions of African-Americans in the southern states didn’t have the right to vote, and lacked other civil rights – and the consequent international embarrassment was part of what allowed the civil rights movement to succeed. But at least by the end of that decade, the US could be seen as a positive example internally in terms of the rule of law, due process and the protection of civil rights and liberties.
Today, the US claims the legal right to indefinitely detain its citizens; the president can order the assassination of a citizen without so much as even a hearing; the government can spy on its citizens without a court order; and its officials are immune from prosecution for war crimes. It doesn’t help that the US has less than 5% of the world’s population but almost a quarter of its prison inmates, many of them victims of a “war on drugs” that is rapidly losing legitimacy in the rest of the world. Assange’s successful pursuit of asylum from the US is another blow to Washington’s international reputation. At the same time, it shows how important it is to have democratic governments that are independent of the US and – unlike Sweden and the UK – will not collaborate in the persecution of a journalist for the sake of expediency. Hopefully other governments will let the UK know that threats to invade another country’s embassy put them outside the bounds of law-abiding nations.
It is interesting to watch pro-Washington journalists and their sources look for self-serving reasons that they can attribute to the government of Ecuador for granting asylum. Correa wants to portray himself as a champion of free speech, they say; or he wants to strike a blow to the US, or put himself forward as an international leader. But this is ridiculous.
Correa didn’t want this mess and it has been a lose-lose situation for him from the beginning. He has suffered increased tension with three countries that are diplomatically important to Ecuador – the US, UK and Sweden. The US is Ecuador’s largest trading partner and has several times threatened to cut off trade preferences that support thousands of Ecuadorian jobs. And since most of the major international media has been hostile to Assange from the beginning, they have used the asylum request to attack Ecuador, accusing the government of a “crackdown” on the media at home. As I have noted elsewhere, this is a gross exaggeration and misrepresentation of Ecuador, which has an uncensored media that is mostly opposed to the government. And for most of the world, these misleading news reports are all that they will hear or read about Ecuador for a long time.
Correa made this decision because it was the only ethical thing to do. And any of the independent, democratic governments of South America would have done the same. If only the world’s biggest media organisations had the same ethics and commitment to freedom of speech and the press.
Now we will see if the UK government will respect international law and human rights conventions and allow Assange safe passage to Ecuador.
Anonymous’ propaganda poster for Operation Egypt, its solidarity campaign in support of Egypt’s street protests. Image courtesy of Anonymous
Anonymous, the international cyberactivist network, has announced the release of 90,000 military email logins which its members obtained in one of the biggest-ever hacking operations.
According to Al Jazeera, the group promised that the publication of the documents on several websites on Monday is only the first in a series of leaks intended to show the intelligence community’s vulnerability.
This round of emails comes from Booz Allen Hamilton, a management consultancy firm based in Virginia, United States.
Booz Allen Hamilton is active in the Middle East and North Africa, with its regional headquarters in the United Arab Emirates.
“With a multidisciplinary approach, Booz Allen provides robust cybersecurity solutions to a broad range of clients and industries, enabling them to confidently pursue the opportunities offered by the cyber revolution,” reads a statement on the company’s website.
The company on its Twitter feed it wrote: “As part of @BoozAllen security policy, we generally do not comment on specific threats or actions taken against our systems.”
A flurry of commentary around the operation began immediately on the microblogging site Twitter under the hashtag #MilitaryMeltdownMonday.
There were hints that other similar military or intelligence contractors may be next to catch attention in the emerging “Antisec” movement.
“ATTN Intelligence community: Your contractors have failed you. Tomorrow is the beginning,” an Anon known as Sabu wrote on Twitter under the handle of @anonymouSabu.
Sabu’s tweets, widely retweeted by other Anons, promised “two of the biggest releases for Anonymous in the last four years”.
Hours earlier, Anons breached the security of IRC Federal, an IT contractor that works for federal agencies in the US, including the FBI and NASA.
A representative at IRC Federal’s head office in West Virginia told the company had reported the incident to the authorities and had no further comment.
He said it was not clear why the firm, which employs less than 35 people, had been targeted.
A statement from Anonymous called on the firm’s employees to stop working for “corporations and a government which uses unethical means to corner vast amounts of wealth”.
“They [IRC] brag about their multi-million dollar partnership with the FBI, Army, Navy, NASA, and the Department of Justice, selling out their “skills” to the US empire. So we laid nuclear waste to their systems, owning their pathetic windows box, dropping their databases and private emails, and defaced their professional looking website,” the statement said.
The amorphous group is in constant evolution, though freedom of speech remains an underlying preoccupation.
It rushed to the defence of WikiLeaks, launching high-profile attacks against financial companies when they responded to governments’ requests to cut the whistle-blowing website’s income.
The latest operations come on the eve of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s appeal hearing against his extradition.
With its support for the Arab uprisings, it went from being largely based in Western countries to gaining popularity amongst like-minded activists in North Africa and the Middle East.
Gabriella Coleman, an anthropologist at NYU’s media department, said that Anonymous has “set the bar very high” in the buildup to this latest series of operations.
“If it is indeed a splash,” she said of this week’s operations, “I think it’ll be a defining moment.”
The hacking of Booz Allen Hamilton and IRC Federal had been conducted in what appeared to be a more open, inclusive manner than similar hacking activities in the past, she said.
“With every twist and turn, new possibilities have opened up.”
Anonymous’ regular online meeting place, the Anonops Internet Relay Chat (IRC), a secure form of online chat room, has been taken offline by “distributed denial of service” (DDoS) attacks carried out by an unknown group. The site, where Anons discuss their operations has been unavailable since Friday and was still unavailable at the time of writing.
In recent months, the movement has come under growing international pressure. Its members have been arrested in Spain, Italy and the United Kingdom, while in the US, its members have been targeted by subpoenas.
Yet, as Monday’s operation demonstrated, the Anons are growing bolder than ever. A defiant press release followed the crackdown in Italy, reiterating that the groups’ lack of leadership or structure made it impossible to dismantle.
“All Anonymous members operate at the same level. Those arrested are not ‘dangerous hackers’ as the media calls them, but people like you. They have been arrested while peacefully protesting for their and your rights. Our protest will continue louder than ever.”
Assange now backs Mathaba’s 3 years old claim that Facebook is the greatest spy system ever created
WikiLeaks founder and Australia citizen Julian Assange called Facebook the “greatest espionage tool in history”, in an exclusive interview to RT.com, confirming what Mathaba already reported about Facebook many years earlier, as well as Google and Yahoo among other close runner-ups.Facebook automatically collects confidential data of the registered site users, and Mathaba and now Assange have alleged that this information is then transferred to the U.S. intelligence which provided seed funding for Zuckerberg’s Facebook.Assange said that we are dealing with “a very detailed database about people, their habits, their social ties, addresses, places of residence, relatives, and all these data is located in the United States and available to U.S. intelligence.”In answer to a question concerning the role of social networks Facebook and Twitter in the recent chaos in the Arab countries with the notable exception of Israel, leading to thousands of deaths, Assange, who is himself funded by the jewish international elitist financier George Soros, said that “Facebook in particular is the most disgusting of all espionage tools ever invented.”
He said that the users should be aware that in adding a contact on Facebook they are working for American intelligence, updating its database, free of charge without any effort nor cost on the part of the CIA. Further, it is easy for other intelligence agencies to either hack Facebook, or get this information from the Americans in exchange for some other services, he pointed out.
Assange confirmed Mathaba’s allegations which preceded the creation of WikiLeaks by several years, saying that “Facebook, Google and Yahoo, all large American companies, have built-in interfaces for the use by the American intelligence. Does this mean that Facebook is in the hands of the American intelligence? No, it is different. It means that the U.S. intelligence agencies have legal and political means to pressure them.”
Assange is currently under luxury house arrest at a millionaire supporter’s home in the English countryside, awaiting the review of his complaint regarding the London court decision on his extradition to Sweden, where he is accused of sexual crimes.
Assange’s lawyers tend to believe that Sweden is seeking the expulsion in order to give the truth-seeker to the USA. Meanwhile, the most famous debunker of our days, who, in fact, did not debunk anything, is restating elementary truths, Igor Bukker of Pravda points out in coverage of the statement of Assange.
“Recently, Facebook has puzzled some of its users by privacy and security settings, and company founder Mark Zuckerberg strongly opposed the anonymity on the Internet. His statement provoked resistance from the founder of website 4chan Christopher “moot” Poole, who considers that preserving the incognito allows people to reveal themselves in all their stark, unfiltered, brutally primitive beauty.”
He points out that the authority, or if you will, popularity of Assange as a “hacker” will not change much in the situation with social networks. “The catchers of people’s souls have made the right bet relying on common stupidity,” Pravda reported.
Assange’s “hacking” has largely relied upon people’s ignorance, and the WikiLeaks group, as well as its off-shoot OpenLeaks, have failed to produce a decent web site nor live up to their name and allow leakers to securely leak documents.
Over the last five years almost a billion people worldwide were in the full sense caught in the net, and their number increases exponentially. The leadership of major media outlets requires their employees to register on such social networking sites as Facebook or its Russian analogue VKontakte, the Russian journalist pointed out.
In contrast, Mathaba operates independent social media networks using open source software, that puts the user in control of their content on federated systems.
“The problem of the leakage of data from social networks, Internet services and mobile devices is becoming ever more urgent. There are regular reports that phones and Android platforms iOS preserve photographs, data on the movement of the device and personal data and send them to the network, “Globalist” reports.
On May 1st “Yandex” has acknowledged that it provided the FSB (Russia’s former KGB state intelligence organization) with the data of people using the services of Yandex, Pravda reported.
“Psychologists believe that the most popular social networks are based on the principle of the Maslow pyramid. According to this theory, the highest level of needs of the individual is simply self-expression. A network user can not only provide information about themselves, but also display their successes, create audio and video libraries, own albums. Yet, few people think about the information that we so thoughtlessly put on our pages. This information becomes a desirable target for the intelligence services and, as the experience of the American social networks indicates, a great way for creditors to determine our true income. There was recorded a range of cases when mentally unbalanced individuals traced and blackmailed users,” “Globalist” reports.
We are no longer able to live without social networking and we will not stop eating fish caught in Japan. Some will continue yelling that it is all lies (like the poisonous “Fukushima” fish), others will continue unsuccessful attempts to resist progress. It would be interesting to find out how the Russian president and other senior officials who opened accounts on Facebook and Twitter are protected from such scrutiny of foreign secret services. It is quite clear why such a question was not posed to Julian Assange. After all, he has repeatedly admitted that his main revelations are yet to come, explaining that the information that has already been revealed is “just the tip of the iceberg.”
“However, it is obvious that the Russian President and anyone else with half a brain, will not post any private information onto a social network unless it is Diaspora”, Mathaba’s ICT Editor said.
Julian Assange has admitted that he is afraid of “a combined Jewish American attack” if he chooses to publish information harmful to the State of Israel
“We preferred not to publish anything about Israel in the first week of the “Wikileaks” publications because this would have caused considerable problems – stated Julian Assange, the owner of the popular leaks website, in an interview with the French newspaper “AgoraVox” which is published in the area of the City of Strasburg.
In an interview that took place several weeks ago but whose contents were only published yesterday (Wednesday) he refers relatively extensively to the Israeli subject. “We put out files from other countries at the beginning”, said Assange, “at the time we did not have in our possession many files about Israel and we were also scared of an attack on us from the East Coast of the United States”.
It would appear that Assange was referring to an attack that would be made on him by the American Jewish Organizations, most of whom are located in New York and Washington. “If we had specifically chosen to start “Wikileaks” publications with information about States that are considered to be sensitive, we would have already found ourselves under attack which would have diverted us from our course”, he stated.
Assange was asked in that interview whether he had anything to fear from the State of Israel and answered “definitely”, explaining that he was concerned about the strong links between Jerusalem and Washington. “The connection between the two countries is what frightens me” he admitted. “Moreover, they had identical interests during the period of the war in Iraq and Bush was surrounded by colleagues who managed oil companies”.
“Israel has deep rooted connections on the East Coast of the USA, and not just because of the presence of a high number of Jews there, but also because the Jews of the East Coast have obtained Israeli passports in order to strengthen the connection with their homeland”, claimed Assange.