List Of Assange Vigils on February 24th in Countries Around the World

3pcbsu.jpg

In an amazing effort to free the Wikileaks founder, Julian Assange, from the clutches of the U.S. empire, supporters around the world have banned together for the extradition trial. I have compiled a list of vigils worldwide. Please share. Also if you are having one not listed contact me and I will add to the list below.

24 FEB Global Free Assange Protest:

NEW ZEALAND

Wellington 12 Noon Parliament Steps

AUCKLAND 12 noon UK Consulate

AUSTRALIA

BRISBANE 9AM – 5PM UK Consulate 100 Eagle St (daily)

SYDNEY 12 NOON Martin Place Amphitheater

MELBOURNE 10AM – 5PM British Consulate

Alice Springs 2 pm onwards, Council Lawns, Vigil and Information Stall.

ADELAIDE 5PM Parliament Steps

SOUTH KOREA

24 Feb 2020 SEOUL 2PM – 8PM Square outside Hyundai U Dept Store

GREECE

ATHENS, GREECE –

Kapnikarea 6PM Συγκέντρωση για τον Julian Assange

SLOVENIA-

24 Feb 2020 LJUBLJANA, SLOVENIA – UK Embassy 3PM

NETHERLANDS

24 Feb 2020 AMSTERDAM 12 NOON Museumplein (Near AH)

(Main protest on Saturday 22 Feb same time and location)

FRANCE

24 Feb 2020 NICE 6PM Place Girabaldi Nice

PARIS – LONDON (23rd Feb 8PM – 25th Feb 8AM)

SWITZERLAND

24 Feb 2020 BERN, SWITZERLAND
4.30PM Helvetiaplatz

BELGIUM

24 Feb 2020 BRUSSELS, BELGIUM 5PM UK Consulate 10 Ave d’Auderghem Comite Free Assange Belgium on FB (Otherwise Weekly MONDAY at Place De la Monnaie)

SCOTLAND

24 Feb 2020 EDINBURGH 10.30AM – 1PM Parliament Building

ENGLAND

24 Feb 2020 LONDON 9.30AM Belmarsh Prison 4 Belmarsh Road, Thamesmead SE28 0HA

*MAIN PROTEST* (all week)

IRELAND

DUBLIN, IRELAND 10AM British Embassy Dublin

UNITED STATES

24 Feb 2020 NEW YORK, USA 11AM – 1PM British Consulate 885 Second Ave (47th)

24 Feb 2020 WASHINGTON DC, USA 12 NOON Whitehouse March to DOJ

and

crew (Events planned ALL WEEK) fb.com/events/3294119 More info. available at action4assange.com

24 Feb 2020 DENVER, USA 4PM – 6PM Union Station

24 Feb 2020 SAN FRANCISCO, USA 12 NOON UK Consulate, 1 Sansome Street, San Francisco

MEXICO

24 Feb 2020 MEXICO CITY 11AM UK Embassy: Calle Río Lerma 71, Cuauhtémoc

MEXICO CITY 3.30PM UK Embassy – March to USA Embassy Calle Río Lerma 71, Cuauhtémoc

22 February 2020

LONDON 11.3h OZ House to ParlimntSQ w/

facebook.com/events/9316090

BASEL 14h 1 munsterbrg

fb.com/events/s/mahnw

STOCKHOLM 12h Soltorget Sigyn Meder on FB

AMSTERDAM 12h Museumplein(AH)

fb.com/events/2256683

25 February 2020 (Tues)

WASHINGTON DC 12h Washington Post MEDIA HQ Tour!

action4assange.com

LONDON 18h St Pancras New Church ‘Imperialism On Trial’

28 February 2020 (Friday)

VICTORIA BC 19.3h 761 StationAve #Jam4Assange

facebook.com/events/1814407

ROCKHAMPTON 9h 20 EastSt #Walk4Assange FreeAssangeCQ facebook.com/events/5385191

WASHINGTON DC 12h Whitehouse March to D.O.J

action4assange.com

HOBART, TASMANIA 12.30h Hobart Parliament Lawns

Rally for #JulianAssange hosted by Free Assange Hobart Speakers incl. President of

Fabian Cangelosi & Founder of

Tasmania Tristan Sykes

STOCKHOLM 12h Soltorget

In solidarity w/

GLOBAL protest when Assange’s extradition hearings start Sweden will not stay silent, we are with Assange! #PressFreedom #Sweden4Assange

Does Assange Stand A Chance At Justice in the United Kingdom?

fb_img_1578703120375363008501.jpg

I wish the answer was yes but it’s unlikely at this point.  At least with Judge Vanessa Baraitser at the helm.  It is obvious in her treatment in prior hearings she already has formed an opinion without ever knowing the plaintiff himself.  She has allowed him to be tortured and lawyer’s access to their client has been almost zero.  With 7 days until the trial actually begins, he still has not had a half a dozen meetings with his lawyers to prepare his defense.  Is that justice or just a show trial?

What about the fact that he is spent much of his time in solitary confinement only to be released a few short weeks ago?  Did they release him because of the many petitions from supporters and inmates or because his trial starts soon and they want him at his best for appearance sake?  They have withheld his mail, put him in a “hot box” prior to a hearing, limited his access to legal documents and the internet and library and who knows what else has happened.  This is not justice in itself.

We also know that the actual judge assigned to this case, Lady Arbuthnot, is compromised due to her husband and son being exposed.  Wikileaks exposed her husband’s wrongdoings and Arbuthnot’s son is connected to a national security agency in the U.S.  Baraitser is under Arbuthnot.  Fair trial?  I think not.  Prejudice is apparent and a decision has probably already been made.

Assange’s hope lies in the fact that the CIA spied on him and his lawyers through a Spanish security agency while in the embassy.  It also may help that the U.S. has refused to extradite Anne Sacoolas, wife of a U.S. diplomat, accused in the death of Harry Dunn.  (See article here). By using diplomatic immunity, in this case, it further renders Assange’s extradition moot as Ecuador once gave him the title of a diplomat.  It also further renders the U.S./ U.K. extradition treaty moot.  If the U.S. cannot keep its side of the bargain, why should British authorities?

According to the Business Insider, (article seen here), Trump and Johnson are feuding.

UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson has canceled a trip to the US planned for next month after a furious phone call from President Donald Trump in which Trump slammed down the phone on the prime minister.

Johnson had been due to visit Washington last month but repeatedly delayed the trip after a series of rows with the president over Iran, Huawei, and a rejected request by the prime minister to extradite the wife of a US diplomat.

The disagreements culminated in a phone call last month in which Trump hung up on Johnson, according to officials with knowledge of the conversation.

Johnson has now canceled his trip altogether, and is not planning on visiting the country until the G7 summit in June.

In an article by WSWS seen here, Jeremy Corbyn, who remained silent for the last ten months on the subject of Assange, asked Boris Johnson about the extradition of Assange.

In a question to Prime Minister Boris Johnson in the House of Commons yesterday, Jeremy Corbyn condemned the attempt to extradite WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange to the United States.

During Prime Minister’s Questions, he cited a recent report by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe branding the attempt to extradite Assange as a “threat to all journalists.” The Labour leader said that Assange had been charged by the US “for exposure of war crimes, the murder of civilians and large-scale corruption.”

He asked: “Will the prime minister agree with the parliamentary report that’s going to the Council of Europe that this extradition should be opposed and the rights of journalists and whistleblowers upheld for the good of all of us?”

Johnson, whose chief ally is President Donald Trump and who gloated over Assange’s arrest last year, declared that he would “not mention any individual cases,” before absurdly claiming that his government would “continue to uphold” “the rights of journalists and whistleblowers.”

The question still remains, will justice be served in this case or will it take an uprising to save Assange from literal extermination in the United States?

Targeting Assange Supporters: Results of my Personal FOIA request to the FBI

 

img_20200125_1421252100542943.jpgIn recent months I received an email from Google stating my emails had been subpoenaed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.  After seeing someone else who had their emails subpoenaed as well, I decided to look into this further through a lawyer friend.  He suggested putting in for an FOIA request with my name and alias which he charged me 25 dollars to take care of.  He had hoped by being a lawyer he would get better results.  This is the part of the response sent to me afterward.  I have not included some personal info that was in the letter.

FOIA

 

It makes me wonder how many others have files on them.  If you are wondering, here is the link on how to request your FOIA:

What Assange Faces If Extradited: The Darkest Corners of U.S. Prisons

ae46787b-06e6-43c5-af30-34b8183276e7-2034368120.jpg

In January, at a routine hearing for the Julian Assange case, U.S. attorneys explained to the court the “special circumstances” in which Assange is to be held stateside.  They intend to hold him in what is known as the darkest corner of the U.S. prison system.  This means that he will have little if any human contact and only with a handful of approved individuals.  This also silences his lawyers.  It is a special kind of torture that results in the prisoner having no contact with the outside world whatsoever.  This is worse than solitary confinement and enables the country to perform other types of torture without public scrutiny or knowledge.

In a report seen here:

 “SAMs are
the darkest corner of the U.S. 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.
Those restrictions include gag orders on prisoners, their family members, and their attorneys, effectively shielding this extreme use of government power from public view.

SAMs deny prisoners the narrow avenues of indirect communication – through sink drains or air vents –
available to prisoners in solitary confinement. They prohibit social contact with anyone except for a few immediate family members, and heavily regulate even those contacts. And they further prohibit prisoners from connecting to the social world via current media and news, limiting prisoners’ access to information to outdated, government-approved materials. Even a prisoner’s communications with his lawyer – which are supposed to be protected by attorney-client privilege – can be subject to monitoring by the FBI.
The U.S. Attorney General has sole discretion to impose SAMs, and a prisoner lacks the most basic procedural protections to allow him to contest the SAMs designation. Indeed, prisoners may be left in the dark as to why they have been subjected to SAMs, because the Attorney General’s justification often cites little more than the prisoner’s charges or conviction. Many prisoners remain under these conditions indefinitely, for years or in some cases even decades.
And court challenges are difficult. For convicted prisoners in particular, the regulations operate to obstruct their access to counsel, impeding the act of filing a challenge. And even when prisoners can bring challenges, courts routinely rule against them,
accepting the government’s vague national security justifications.5
The imposition of SAMs extends beyond convicted prisoners. Federal prosecutors regularly request that the Attorney General place defendants under these punishing conditions while they await trial, beforethey have been convicted of any crime. In numerous cases, the Attorney General recommends lifting SAMs after the defendant pleads guilty. This practice erodes defendants’ presumption of innocence and serves as a tool to coerce them into cooperating with the government and pleading guilty. Indeed, the Central Intelligence Agency (“CIA”) for years relied on the torture of isolation and sensory deprivation as a tool to elicit what it termed “learned helplessness” in detainees suspected of terrorism. For those defendants who do fight their charges at trial, SAMs infect the entire proceeding, limiting prisoners’ capacity to participate in their defense and hindering their attorneys’ abilities to investigate and zealously advocate. 

In addition to shrinking the entirety of the prisoner’s world to the four corners of his prison cell, SAMs prevent anyone else from understanding what happens within. Prisoners under SAMs are prohibited from communicating with anyone except a few pre-approved individuals – their attorneys and immediate family members – and SAMs prohibit those individuals from repeating the prisoner’s words to anyone else. There is also an explicit prohibition on all forms of communication with the media. In effect, the regulations silence those most qualified to attest to the harms of SAMs. The Department of Justice (“DOJ”) further shrouds SAMs under a veil of secrecy by concealing who is subject to these conditions and why. Indeed, the DOJ and Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) consistently ignore or deny Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) requests seeking basic information about prisoners under SAMs. The psychological and physiological harms are thus hidden from public oversight and democratic
accountability.”

Many seem to think that Assange would be better off if extradited, but this is not the case as the U.S. government intends to try him without his Constitutional rights.  We will have no way of knowing what happens to him while awaiting trial.  If Chelsea Manning’s torture while incarcerated is any example, Assange faces a terrible injustice ahead.  If the threats found in the Strafor Emails seen below are to be used, Assange will be systematically tortured for publishing war crimes without ever being convicted.

dkvnhz0wwae6x4x375144804.jpg

 

dljyz6uw4amlcqr1476104134.jpg

In an article I shared earlier titled Why Assange Fears Extradition to the U.S., I explain what his lawyers stated in a court hearing which convicted him of bail jumping for seeking political asylum:

In a summary of the court hearing seen here by Catherine Brown, the defense shows the torture techniques used on Chelsea Manning which included one year in solitary confinement.

“She was held in military detention under conditions of sleep deprivation, kept naked, and forced to parade as such in front of military personnel.

Just to remind you, there were two cases involved the surrender of people by Sweden to Egypt – a state well known to practice torture – with the active assistance of America. They are not isolated cases, as the judgments make clear, and America’s involvement can be made clear at para 10.2 of the [Aguisa – sp.?] judgement, in which the circumstances of their expulsion are set out.

[The details of the people involved in one such case:] They were handcuffed at Stockholm airport. A private plane of the US landed. They were stripped – their clothes were cut off them. Suppositories were placed in their penises. They were dressed in nappies. They were chained to specially-designed stress harnesses for the duration of their transit.”

In the same article seen above:

Another statement found in the Wikileaks Stratfor emails states:

“Burton also says he “would pursue [c]onspiracy and [p]olitical [t]errorism charges and declassify the death of a source someone which [he] could link to Wiki” (1074383). Burton’s strategy is to: “[b]ankrupt the arsehole first,” Burton states, “ruin his life. Give him 7-12 yrs for conspiracy.”

“The owner [Julian Assange] is a peacenik. He needs his head dunked in a full toilet bowl at Gitmo.”

Furthermore, even the U.N. special rapporteur on torture, Nils Melzer, has stated that Assange is facing a show trial and stands no chance in the U.S.  Especially since the CIA had been spying on him through a Spanish security agency while he was in the embassy and obtained video and audio of his meetings with his attorneys.  This simply is against all laws and his human rights.  If you can advocate for his extradition after seeing these facts, you do not support Julian Assange.

If the U.K. courts rule to extradite Assange, they are literally signing his death warrant.  Julian Assange has no chance of surviving in the U.S. prison systems.  We, as free citizens, must fight for his rights and in doing so, ensure future generations of their own rights as humans.

Is Assange Covered By The Same Constitutional Rights As U.S. Citizens?

The answer is definitely, yes! Here is why…

The U.S. government is attempting to set a dangerous precedent not only against journalists but its own Constitution by stating in last Thursday’s Assange hearing. They say that Julian Assange has no rights in this case as a foreigner. The problem with this statement is very clear. The Constitution of the United States was written to protect human rights against government that seeks to harm the individual.

The Founding Fathers had just declared independence from England who ruled them with an iron fist, taking away their rights while taxing them literally to death. After winning the Revolutionary War, those who fought so valiantly for their freedom and their rights wanted to make sure it could not be taken away. So they put together a Constitution and a bill of rights to protect the people.

Mind you, when they fought for independence they were not citizens of the United States yet. They didn’t just want to protect themselves but everyone. A key part of the Declaration of Independence says the following:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Notice there is no mention of those rights are not for certain people, but all men. You cannot bring a foreign national on to American soil and prosecute him under U.S. laws and not give him certain inalienable rights.

In an article in Forbes magazine seen Here:

How does the Constitution apply to a non-citizen?

The same way it applied to enemy combatants held at the U.S. base in Guantanamo Bay in a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Boumediene v. Bush, which held that the basic right of habeas corpus to challenge illegal detentions extends even to non-citizens on foreign territory.

Also in an article seen here:

There is a misconception that the U.S. Constitution applies only to U.S. citizens. Some passages and phrases in our laws explicitly state only “citizens” are afforded certain rights, such as the right to vote. When the terms “resident” or “person” is used instead of citizen, the rights and privileges afforded are extended to protect citizens and non-citizens alike. Moreover, protections under the 14th Amendment ensure that no particular group is discriminated against unlawfully.

Bill of Rights

Nowhere in the first 10 amendments to the Constitution is the word “citizen.” Often it is written “The right of the people…” The Bill of Rights protects everyone, including undocumented immigrants, to exercise free speech, religion, assembly, and to be free from unlawful government interference.

The fact is, our government thinks it can decide who has rights and who doesn’t as in the case of Mr. Assange. If we allow them to do this to a foreign journalist then they can decide who else has rights including citizens of the United States. The American lawyers in the case of Julian Assange are violating our rights by choosing to ignore the Constitution. They are not the Supreme Court, they are simply lawyers. In fact, not even the State Department or the president has a right to decide who is covered under the Constitution.

Yet another article from Learn Liberty as shown here makes the following statement:

Immigration restrictionists sometimes claim that noncitizens have no rights under the Constitution, and that the US government is therefore free to deal with them in whatever way it wants. At least as a general rule, this claim is simply false.

Noncitizens undeniably have a wide range of rights under the Constitution. Indeed, within the borders of the United States, they have most of the same rights as citizens do, and longstanding Supreme Court precedent bans most state laws discriminating against noncitizens. There is little if any serious controversy among experts over this matter.

Simply put, the U.S. government and its lawyers in this case, are doing something very illegal by stating Assange has no free speech or free press rights. Will Americans allow their government to destroy a man? Will they permit such a travesty of justice to stand? Will they allow the Constitution to be ignored? Or will they fight against this precedent and stand up for their own rights in process?

Sex, Lies and Assange

Sex…

Lies…

Assange…

83658438_478795476383617_2093677414407208960_o.jpg

Now that I have your full attention…

Someone told me today I have a one-track mind. Yeah, I guess I do. Freeing Assange is extremely important. It sets a precedent against freedom and by God, that IS IMPORTANT!

Do you like being able to speak your mind without being arrested?
Guess what? If we allow Assange to be extradited and convicted it sets a legal precedent to SILENCE YOU!!!!

Are you sick of seeing your favorite independent journalists removed from social media?
First, they took Assange.
This is how censorship works. Once you silence one of the truthtellers, it leads to silencing them all. Soon all you have is propaganda…

Something is really wrong with a society who allows war criminals who have committed despicable crimes to grow free but indicts a journalist who exposed those war crimes to 175 years in prison.
All Julian Assange ever wanted was two things. ..
1. Justice for the innocent.
2. Governments held accountable for their criminal activity.
Are the American people going to allow a man to be destroyed and tortured for telling them the truth?

We have a right to hold our government accountable for its crimes against humanity. If we allow the free press to become a thing of the past, our ability to know when our government commits atrocities will be gone forever. We will be no better off than NAZI Germany.

The US government likes to frame people who speak out against their crimes. They like to make the good look evil to validate when they martyr them. When they silenced Assange, they silenced the voice of the people. He stood up for those who had no voice. Now we need to stand up for him. Tell your elected officials via phone, letter or postcard they will be held accountable if they do not Free Assange.

They framed Assange with fake allegations of sex crimes, going so far as to change the supposed victims’ testimonies in Sweden. Nils Melzer, the U.N. rapporteur on torture reveals the whole treacherous story here.

After you read that, you realize just how bad 3 governments wanted to silence Assange.  Those governments include the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States but mostly the title of tyrannical goes to the U.S. government.  The U.S. government seeks to murder Assange after having the U.K. do its dirty work by abducting him from the Ecuadorian Embassy and having Ecuador revoke his asylum.  This is a crime against humanity.

I personally am sick of my government destroying my rights, taxing me so they can wage wars and steal from the poor. I am sick of the lies both sides tell. I want my government held accountable for its crimes. Without Assange, we have no hope of ever being able to do so. Our government seeks to set a precedent than any journalist who publishes government crimes will be prosecuted under the Espionage Act. By spying on Assange, they seek to make it possible to make spying on is legal. This is against our 4th amendment rights!

After spying on Assange, how can he even hope to get a fair trial in the U.S.?  He simply cannot.  Any hope for justice at all is lost. In the above mentioned article, Nils states the following:

You’re saying that the targeting of Assange threatens the very core of press freedoms.
‘Let’s see where we will be in 20 years if Assange is convicted – what you will still be able to write then as a journalist. I am convinced that we are in serious danger of losing press freedoms. It’s already happening: Suddenly, the headquarters of ABC News in Australia was raided in connection with the «Afghan War Diary». The reason? Once again, the press uncovered misconduct by representatives of the state. In order for the division of powers to work, the state must be monitored by the press as the fourth estate. WikiLeaks is a the logical consequence of an ongoing process of expanded secrecy: If the truth can no longer be examined because everything is kept secret, if investigation reports on the U.S. government’s torture policy are kept secret and when even large sections of the published summary are redacted, leaks are at some point inevitably the result. WikiLeaks is the consequence of rampant secrecy and reflects the lack of transparency in our modern political system. There are, of course, areas where secrecy can be vital. But if we no longer know what our governments are doing and the criteria they are following, if crimes are no longer being investigated, then it represents a grave danger to societal integrity.’

What are the consequences?
“As the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and, before that, as a Red Cross delegate, I have seen lots of horrors and violence and have seen how quickly peaceful countries like Yugoslavia or Rwanda can transform into infernos. At the roots of such developments are always a lack of transparency and unbridled political or economic power combined with the naivete, indifference and malleability of the population. Suddenly, that which always happened to the other – unpunished torture, rape, expulsion and murder – can just as easily happen to us or our children. And nobody will care. I can promise you that.”

He also states:

“A murderous system is being created before our eyes…”

People, we must open our eyes.  We must leave our comfort zones and end this now! We must free Assange and by doing so, free ourselves from the arms of our tarantula-like leaders who seek to devour our freedoms like a vampire feeds on blood.  We must fight for what is left of our rights as individuals through the fight the free Assange.

Julian Assange Today: Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize, John Shipton, EU Council and more

Updates on Julian Assange

In a tweet by Oscar Parilli, a senator in Argentina, stated the following:

Nominamos a #JulianAssange y WikiLeaks para el Premio Nobel de la Paz, como uno de los contribuyentes más importantes a la libertad de expresión y la transparencia en el siglo XXI, impactando directamente la paz global.


Translation below:

This makes 8 times I do believe. How can a man like Pompeo attack Assange with statements like selfish and arrogant as well as calling Wikileaks “a non-state hostile intelligence agency” which basically is calling them terrorists when Assange has been nominated that many times?
He did his job as a journalist as well as an editor. He is not arrogant and selfish but is called generous and humble by many who know him personally. To me, this attack by now Secretary of State was made to attempt invalidate #Vault7 and to take the focus off himself as CIA director and his agency for spying on American citizens. As well as a ploy to get vengeance on the editor. Pompeo is also the “diplomat” who helped coerce Ecuador by bribing them with a 5.6 billion IMF loan to end Assange’s political asylum at the embassy in London.

In other news, the EU council met earlier this week and has demanded the release of Julian Assange.


Even though the British government is leaving the EU they still have numerous trade deals in place. If they do not comply with this ruling, how will it affect their economy? How will other European countries and the world view their obvious human rights violations? (This includes their abduction of Assange from the Ecuadorian embassy).

Keeping him in Belmarsh, (nicknamed “Britain’s Gitmo” and “Hellmarsh”), which is a Category A prison, while he is on remand is not only a distorted atrocity but puts him in danger. Belmarsh holds terrorists murderers and rapists. Assange is an intellectual. He is gentle, kind and humble. He does not deserve to be in a supermax prison.
The U.N. has also called for his release several times as well as the Mexican President and other organizations.
However, Amnesty International refuses to back this up, claiming Assange’s case it not one of conscience. If this is not a case that Amnesty is willing to fight what the hell is?

In an article from Sputnik where John Shipton, Assange’s father, was interviewed, John states the following (article seen here):


Sputnik: And what was his condition like?

John Shipton:Pretty dire. [United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Nils] Melzer’s and the doctors’ – the 160 doctors, – analysis or diagnosis is pretty sharp.

Sputnik: Recently it was also announced that US government is lagging in its legal submissions in relation to the extradition case at least; the documents that it submitted to the relevant party senior in the UK, that the Trump administration is claiming that protections under the First Amendment of US Constitution as they relate to freedom of the press and freedom of speech, don’t apply to foreign journalists. Have you heard? Are you aware of that claim?

John Shipton:Yes, I see that they keep on extending their claims to continue with the judicial abduction of Julian. If I can make the point that over the last 10 years the United States has introduced a policy. The policy covers two areas. One is that of judicial abduction, rewriting extradition treaties between nations, any nation that they could rewrite to simplify extradition. The other is extrajudicial murder. So, in the case of judicial abduction, there is Mike Lynch, Julian Assange, Ola Bini, and the Chief Executive Officer of Huawei. They abduct people who are journalists or who have the knowledge of technology that the United States wants. The parallel policy is extrajudicial murder which we have just seen demonstrated with the murder of Soleimani. This is taking the United States outside the civilized family of nations. And they seem determined to plunder Europe and to extend their laws to every other nation in the world.

The U.S. empire, in an effort to win this battle over the free press, hired U.C. security systems out of Spain to spy on Assange, his lawyers, doctors, and visitors while in the Ecuadorian embassy. They turned over data monthly. This is a violation of lawyer-client privilege as well as doctor-patient privilege, not to mention an invasion of privacy.
When Daniel Ellsberg was charged under the Espionage for leaking the Pentagon Papers the case was dropped due to U.S. governmental misconduct because they were spying on Ellsberg and his lawyers. This case sets a precedent. Assange simply cannot be charged in this case due to government misconduct. The CIA spied on Mr. Assange and has all his data and the paperwork regarding this case, giving then an unfair advantage to prosecute.
If you think this case is a fair one, you have been misled. It is time the U.S. dropped its case and the U.K. freed Assange.

Should U.S. Lawyers in the Assange Case Be Disbarred For Violating the Constitution of the United States?

uncux904806984.png

The answer is definitely, yes!  Here is why…

The U.S. government is attempting to set a dangerous precedent not only against journalists but its own Constitution by stating in last Thursday’s Assange hearing. They say that Julian Assange has no rights in this case as a foreigner. The problem with this statement is very clear. The Constitution of the United States was written to protect human rights against government that seeks to harm the individual.

The Founding Fathers had just declared independence from England who ruled them with an iron fist, taking away their rights while taxing them literally to death. After winning the Revolutionary War, those who fought so valiantly for their freedom and their rights wanted to make sure it could not be taken away. So they put together a Constitution and a bill of rights to protect the people.

Mind you, when they fought for independence they were not citizens of the United States yet. They didn’t just want to protect themselves but everyone. A key part of the Declaration of Independence says the following:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Notice there is no mention of those rights are not for certain people, but all men. You cannot bring a foreign national on to American soil and prosecute him under U.S. laws and not give him certain inalienable rights.

In an article in Forbes magazine seen Here:

How does the Constitution apply to a non-citizen?

The same way it applied to enemy combatants held at the U.S. base in Guantanamo Bay in a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Boumediene v. Bush, which held that the basic right of habeas corpus to challenge illegal detentions extends even to non-citizens on foreign territory. 

Also in an article seen here:

There is a misconception that the U.S. Constitution applies only to U.S. citizens. Some passages and phrases in our laws explicitly state only “citizens” are afforded certain rights, such as the right to vote. When the terms “resident” or “person” is used instead of citizen, the rights and privileges afforded are extended to protect citizens and non-citizens alike. Moreover, protections under the 14th Amendment ensure that no particular group is discriminated against unlawfully.

 

Bill of Rights

Nowhere in the first 10 amendments to the Constitution is the word “citizen.” Often it is written “The right of the people…” The Bill of Rights protects everyone, including undocumented immigrants, to exercise free speech, religion, assembly, and to be free from unlawful government interference.

 

Bill of Rights

Nowhere in the first 10 amendments to the Constitution is the word “citizen.” Often it is written “The right of the people…” The Bill of Rights protects everyone, including undocumented immigrants, to exercise free speech, religion, assembly, and to be free from unlawful government interference.

The fact is, our government thinks it can decide who has rights and who doesn’t as in the case of Mr. Assange.  If we allow them to do this to a foreign journalist then they can decide who else has rights including citizens of the United States.  The American lawyers in the case of Julian Assange are violating our rights by choosing to ignore the Constitution.  They are not the Supreme Court, they are simply lawyers.  In fact, not even the State Department or the president has a right to decide who is covered under the Constitution.  These lawyers should be disbarred for infringing on our Bill of Rights.

Yet another article from Learn Liberty as shown here makes the following statement:

Immigration restrictionists sometimes claim that noncitizens have no rights under the Constitution, and that the US government is therefore free to deal with them in whatever way it wants. At least as a general rule, this claim is simply false.

Noncitizens undeniably have a wide range of rights under the Constitution. Indeed, within the borders of the United States, they have most of the same rights as citizens do, and longstanding Supreme Court precedent bans most state laws discriminating against noncitizens. There is little if any serious controversy among experts over this matter. 

Simply put, the U.S. government and its lawyers in this case, are doing something very illegal by stating Assange has no free speech or free press rights.  Will Americans allow their government to destroy a man?  Will they permit such a travesty of justice to stand?  Will they allow the Constitution to be ignored?  Or will they fight against this precedent and stand up for their own rights in process?

Trump’s War on Journalism Is A War on the First Amendment of the Constitution

shutterstock_editorial_10434333bm1610836416.jpg

The Oath of Office as President of the United States:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

 

I voted for Trump. I supported him tooth and nail, but it has become evident through his attack on the press, that he has violated his sacred oath of office.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

By taking his sacred oath of office to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, President Trump agreed to Uphold the First Amendment regardless. His war on journalism and the media is not only a violation of the Constitution but shows a great deal of disrespect for it.

In essence, Trump wants to silence any voice that either opposes him or exposes him. This isn’t just about mainstream media folks. This is about stripping the press’s right to publish. The president simply has no right to interfere with the free press or free speech regardless of whether it is aimed at him.
Quoted from Trump’s speech at the White House in July of 2019:

“To me free speech is not when you see something good and then you purposely write bad,” he insisted. “To me that’s very dangerous speech, and you become angry at it. But that’s not free speech.”From an article on Politico seen here:Having previously established himself the foe of the First Amendment—calling defenders of free speech on the internet “foolish people,” coercing White House staffers into signing nondisclosure agreements, attacking the mainstream press as the enemy of the people and urging the jailing of flag-burners—Trump has seemingly switched sides.
He even brought Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey to the Oval Office recently to lecture him on how to run his platform, telling him the site was “very discriminatory” and “hard for people to sign on.” Accusing Twitter of “playing their political games” (on Twitter, no less), Trump writes, “No wonder Congress wants to get involved—and they should,” a statement that all but threatens regulation of speech.

In a recent article by the Intercept stating the A to Z reasons for impeachment (Which I disagree only with their statement on Roger Stone and Wikileaks) seen here:

MEDIA ATTACKS

Trump, as even Fox News host Chris Wallace observed last week, “is engaged in the most direct, sustained assault on freedom of the press in our history.” The president has asked the FBI to jail reporters who publish leaks, threatened to revoke the broadcast licenses of media organizations that criticize him, and relentlessly attacked and demonized journalists as “scum,” “slime,” “sick people,” “fake news,” and “the enemy of the people.” Members of the press have received death threats from people echoing the president’s vile language.

 

Trump has called the press, which would include independent journalists such as myself, “Enemies of the People.”  There is a long history behind this phrase going back to Roman times but in recent history, it was used by the NAZIS against the Jews, by Stalin and Lenin against those who opposed communism and used to label revolutionaries who were executed during the “Reign of Terror” in the French Revolution. Consequently, it was used to give anyone who opposed their government’s tyranny. This is a dangerous label to place on the press.

According to an article in the Business Insider seen here:

“The formula ‘enemy of the people was specifically introduced for the purpose of physically annihilating such individuals,” Khrushchev said in a 1956 speech to the Soviet Communist Party.

The question being raised then is if Trump intends to annihilate journalists. It appears so in his statement on Wikileaks in 2017:

I think it’s disgraceful, I think there should be like death penalty or something,” Trump said during the quick exchange uncovered online by CNN’s KFile.”

With the founder of Wikileaks behind bars awaiting extradition to the U.S. to face 18 indictments under the antiquated Espionage Act, escalated by the Trump administration, it is obvious Trump is waging war not just on the press in his own country but worldwide. If Assange is extradited and convicted, it will set a precedent against anyone who speaks up against criminal activity by the U.S. government. This opens doors to all sorts of terrible atrocities being committed. Trump has managed in his hateful rhetoric of journalists who mostly just want to keep the People informed, in turning many against us, maybe even provoking violence. Many of us have received threatening letters and even death threats by simply reporting.
With journalists under fire, like Assange and Greenwald, and many being murdered like Khassogi and the journalists in Ecuador, to continue attacking the press is extremely dangerous.
The job of journalism was once viewed as holding the government accountable for its actions. Many of the founding fathers understood this as seen in the quotes below:

“No government ought to be without censors, and, where the press is free, no one ever will.”
Thomas Jefferson“Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”~Thomas Jefferson

“The liberty of the press is essential to the security of the state.”
~John Adams

“Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government: When this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved.”
~Benjamin Franklin

“The freedom of speech may be taken away, and dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep, to the slaughter.”— George Washington

A free press is essential to liberty and holding government accountable regardless of Donald’s hurt feelings. Any war on free press is a war on the Constitution and therefore is a war on its citizens who are protected by it. Trump has violated his oath of office by attacking the right to free press. The founding fathers would be disgusted by this onslaught and behavior from an elected leader.

Victory For Assange Supporters! Assange Moved Out of Solitary And More

It was announced today by Wikileaks Ambassador, Joseph Farrel, that due to pressure from prison inmates, his legal team and Assange supporters that Julian Assange was being moved from solitary confinement on Belmarsh’s “hospital ward” to a block with 40 other inmates. This is a win for all those fighting so hard against his belittling treatment while incarcerated.

We also learned in court on Thursday that the United States attorneys stated that Assange would not be given First Amendment rights under the Constitution.
However, they need to be reminded that the Constitution was written to keep the government in check and the government does not have the right to pick and choose who is covered by these inalienable rights.

According to the Declaration of Independence signed by the forefathers prior to the Constitution:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.-“

The Declaration does not say all men are created equal except foreign nationals nor does it say that there are certain inalienable rights given only to citizens. It specifically states ALL MEN. When the founding fathers wrote this statement they were British citizens declaring their independence from England. They knew that many people would come to the United States and the Constitution was written for all men and women.
Look up “subversion”. I don’t know who is driving the US prosecution of Julian Assange, but what could be more subversive than arguing that #1A restrictions on government don’t apply to foreign journalists?
Whoever is spearheading this approach – (President Donald Trump, Secretary of State Pompeo, Pence, William Barr, Brennan???) – is actively subverting the Constitution and Bill of Rights of the UnitedStates, & must be considered an Enemy Of The People.

Another question for the U.S. prosecuting lawyers is this: How can a foreign journalist be prosecuted under an antiquated Espionage Act but not receive the same rights given to citizens?

From Caitlin Johnstone:

“The First Amendment is not a set of special free speech privileges that the US government magnanimously bestows upon a few select individuals, it’s a limitation placed upon the US government’s ability to restrict rights that all persons everywhere are assumed to have.”

The fact is if the U.K. extradited Assange, it is not only violating human rights but targeting its own citizen journalists to be arrested for reporting any activity that the United States feels could be dangerous to it’s own interests which are basically crimes against humanity. By allowing Assange to face criminal prosecution for political reasons, they are in contempt of their own extradition laws. They will appear to enslaved to the United States which at one time, was the other way around.
The U.S. empire has simply become a tyrannical oligarchy that terrorized the world and wants to dominate all. The government and its agencies think they are above international law, practice government overreach in cases of what they call classified info, and have become what their founding fathers sought to prevent. There must be an uprising against this totalitarian regime and it must be brought under control before it destroys us all. Julian Assange is just a pawn in a bad game of 3D chess where the U.S. government is cheating.
We the People have taken one step to win by pressuring the U.K. into releasing him from solitary confinement, now we must continue in the battle and free him. We do it for him. We do it for Freedom.