MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Lula supports Assange's cause
During his recent visit to London, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva expressed his strong disapproval of the UK's treatment of Julian Assange. Lula criticized the UK for imprisoning the WikiLeaks founder for his professional activities as a journalist and called for his immediate release. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesBravo, Lula.
May 09th, 2023 - 11:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0Julian has been pursued by every US administration since Obama and the uniparty (Demopublican / Republicrat) has no intention to let this man go. I doubt he would be safe if offered asylum in Brazil, but I'd be happy to have him as a neighbor.
Geeeeeee...
May 09th, 2023 - 12:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Finally a point I doagree with that Yankee Mr. FortHay commentator...!
But..., worth to mention that the “Kennedycrats” (Bob Jr. & Caroline, et al.) have gone public with their intentions of either pardoning Julian or dropping all charges...
Will be interesting to see..., in case of the above happening..., if them Brutish will keep Assange in their safety box..., as they are doing with all that nice &juicy “confiscated” Venezuelan Gold...
Capisce...?
So important to Lula he had forgotten to discuss the matter with U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’.
May 09th, 2023 - 02:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0https://apnews.com/article/brazil-lula-coronation-london-julian-assange-wikileaks-a994ffc406fc8df19e0f1a9ac1c0ed16
Firstly, for most of the time Jules was not imprisoned by the British at all, but was a guest at the Ecuadorian embassy, entirely of his own volition.
Secondly, he skipped bail and hid in the Ecuadorian embassy to avoid extradition to Sweden on rape/sexual assault charges, nothing to do with his’ professional activities as a journalist’ .
I don’t see how ‘the First Amendment’, or ‘constitutional free press guarantee’, apply when the issue is skipping bale to avoid rape/sexual assault charges in Sweden.
He stayed in the Ecuadorian embassy until the statute of limitations ran out in Sweden. Then the Ecuadorians kicked him out, whereupon he was arrested for breach of bail (you don’t get bailed for that), again nothing to do with his’ professional activities as a journalist’.
Then, with no prior, outstanding extradition warrant from Sweden to complicate matters, was the Americans que to make their extradition request.
He avoided charges in Sweden but thereby left himself open to extradition to the US.
He is currently detained awaiting a decision on extradition to the US, which you could argue is because of his’ professional activities as a journalist’, however he cannot expect bail again, when he has already skipped bail once to avoid extradition on serious charges.
Mr Assange has only himself to blame for his current predicament. Had he gone back to Sweden when he was supposed to, whatever the outcome, he would be out now and home free.
Stupid or what, go figure!!!
“The Obama administration had concluded that it could not charge WikiLeaks or Julian Assange with crimes related to publishing classified documents — documents that showed, among other things, evidence of U.S. war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan — without criminalizing investigative journalism itself. President Barack Obama’s Justice Department called this the “New York Times problem,” because if WikiLeaks and Assange were criminals for publishing classified information, the New York Times would be just as guilty.
May 09th, 2023 - 10:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Five years later, in 2018, the Trump administration indicted Assange anyway. But rather than charging him with espionage for publishing classified information, they charged him with conspiracy to commit a computer crime, later adding 17 counts of espionage in a superseding May 2019 indictment and expanding on those charges in another superseding indictment in June 2020.
The computer charges claimed that, in 2010, Assange conspired with his source, Chelsea Manning, to crack an account on a Windows computer in her military base, and that the “primary purpose of the conspiracy was to facilitate Manning’s acquisition and transmission of classified information.” The account enabled internet file transfers using a protocol known as FTP.
New testimony from the third week of Assange’s extradition trial makes it increasingly clear that this hacking charge is incredibly flimsy. The alleged hacking not only didn’t happen, according to expert testimony at Manning’s court martial hearing in 2013 and again at Assange’s extradition trial last week, but it also couldn’t have happened.
The new testimony, reported earlier this week by investigative news site Shadowproof, also shows that Manning already had authorized access to, and the ability to exfiltrate, all of the documents that she was accused of leaking — without receiving any technical help from WikiLeaks.”
https://theintercept.com/2020/09/30/assange-extradition-cfaa-hacking/
All of which has nothing to do with why he was holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy.
May 10th, 2023 - 12:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/apr/11/how-ecuador-lost-patience-with-houseguest-julian-assange#:~:text=When%20Julian%20Assange%2C%20disguised,next%20exited%20the%20front%20door.
‘An investigation into one of the Swedish women’s accusations, of sexual assault, was discontinued in 2015 after the statute of limitations expired, and in 2017, Sweden’s chief prosecutor said she was dropping her investigation into the outstanding allegation of rape after concluding there was no practical way of continuing.
Nothing to do with WikiLeaks or his ‘professional activities as a journalist’.
Mr Assange has only himself to blame for his current predicament. Had he gone back to Sweden when he was supposed to, whatever the outcome, he would be out now and home free.
Stupid or what, go figure!!!
“Sweden’s chief prosecutor said she was dropping her investigation into the outstanding allegation of rape after concluding there was no practical way of continuing.”
May 10th, 2023 - 10:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0That is untrue according to: “The deputy chief prosecutor, Eva-Marie Persson, said … that after nearly a decade, witnesses’ memories had faded. After conducting a comprehensive assessment of what has emerged during the course of the preliminary investigation I then make the assessment that the evidence is not strong enough to form the basis for filing an indictment,”
http s ://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/nov/19/sweden-drops-julian-assange-investigation.
“A key witness in the Department of Justice’s case against Julian Assange has admitted that his entire testimony is false, a revelation that could be the death knell for US attempts to prosecute the Wikileaks founder.
Sigurdur Ingi Thordarson, often known as “Siggi the Hacker,” made the confession to Icelandic outlet Stundin (6/26/21) last weekend. The article details how Thordarson, a convicted felon, pedophile and diagnosed sociopath, used his position to steal money from Wikileaks, and received immunity from prosecution from the FBI in a quid pro quo.
Such a blatant and juicy piece of important news should have made worldwide headlines. But, instead, as of Friday, July 2, there has been literally zero coverage of it in corporate media; not one word in the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, NBC News, Fox News or NPR. A search online for either “Assange” or “Thordarson” will elicit zero relevant articles from establishment sources, either US or elsewhere in the Anglosphere, even in tech-focused platforms like the Verge, Wired or Gizmodo.”
https://fair.org/home/key-assange-witness-recants-with-zero-corporate-media-coverage/
Stupid or what, go figure!!!
So, when you post a link to the Guardian, it’s true, but when someone else does ‘it’s untrue’, you did realise that both articles were in the Guardian??? Didn’t you???
May 10th, 2023 - 02:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Either way, which ever version you chose to believe, the fact remains that had he gone back to Sweden, he would not be in the Shit he is now.
He spent seven years in the Ecuadorian embassy avoiding extradition to Sweden and now he is in jail awaiting extradition to the US and a trillion year sentence.
Had he gone back to Sweden, whatever the outcome, he would be home free by now.
Muther Fu*king Dumb decision by him!!!
WTF has “Siggi the Hacker” and the FBI got to do with extradition to Sweden for sexual offences???
“Sweden’s chief prosecutor said she was dropping her investigation into the outstanding allegation of rape after concluding there was no practical way of continuing.”
May 10th, 2023 - 02:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Christopher Hitchens
I don’t assert that, the Guardian does, the same paper you are quoting.
May 10th, 2023 - 10:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0My point being that the reason for dropping the case is irrelevant here, the question is:
Are you saying that Julian Assange hiding in the Ecuadorian embassy, to avoid rape charges in Sweden (regardless of why they were eventually dropped), was a smart decision???
It’s a yes or no answer.
My contention is that it was a ‘Muther Fu*king Dumb decision’, that has probably cost him the rest of his life.
BTW, was ‘Siggi the Hacker’ any relative of Nog Bad the Bad???
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pyOJgNnvYo
He was one of Stinks ancestors, you know???
“It’s a yes or no answer” that is the height of sophistry an ‘and or argument’
May 10th, 2023 - 11:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Are you saying that Julian Assange hiding in the Ecuadorian embassy.”
I have never made any such reference, as I have simply addressed the attempts by the US to have him transferred to them on unsubstantiated charges.
“BTW, was ‘Siggi the Hacker”
Was apparently the star witness that the DOP was relying on.
“The article details how Thordarson, a convicted felon, pedophile and diagnosed sociopath, used his position to steal money from Wikileaks, and received immunity from prosecution from the FBI in a quid pro quo.”
https://fair.org/home/key-assange-witness-recants-with-zero-corporate-media-coverage/
“An assertion is a statement offered as a conclusion without supporting evidence. Since an argument is defined as a logical relationship between premise and conclusion, a simple assertion is not an argument.”
Ignoring the Burden of Proof http ://learn.lexiconic.net/fallacies/index.htm
I am simply asking the question:
May 12th, 2023 - 12:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0‘Do you think that Julian Assange hiding in the Ecuadorian embassy, to avoid rape charges in Sweden (regardless of why they were eventually dropped), was a smart decision???’
You have an opinion don’t you, or don’t you??? Surely you can formulate an answer to a simple question without having to hide behind accusations of ‘sophistry’???
It’s really not that complicated, I have stated: ‘my contention is that it was a ‘Muther F*cking Dumb decision’, that has probably cost him the rest of his life.
What do you THINK???
Err, a copy/paste answer, is not an answer, Capishhhh!!!
BTW, ‘Siggi the Hacker’, is really not relevant to the question in hand.
‘Siggi the Hacker’, is really not relevant to the question in hand
May 12th, 2023 - 10:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0A key witness that the DOP is relying on, is highly relevant.
“A key witness in the Department of Justice’s case against Julian Assange has admitted that his entire testimony is false, a revelation that could be the death knell for US attempts to prosecute the Wikileaks founder.
Sigurdur Ingi Thordarson, often known as “Siggi the Hacker,” made the confession to Icelandic outlet Stundin (6/26/21) last weekend. The article details how Thordarson, a convicted felon, pedophile and diagnosed sociopath, used his position to steal money from Wikileaks, and received immunity from prosecution from the FBI in a quid pro quo.
Such a blatant and juicy piece of important news should have made worldwide headlines. But, instead, as of Friday, July 2, there has been literally zero coverage of it in corporate media; not one word in the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, NBC News, Fox News or NPR. A search online for either “Assange” or “Thordarson” will elicit zero relevant articles from establishment sources, either US or elsewhere in the Anglosphere, even in tech-focused platforms like the Verge, Wired or Gizmodo.”
https://fair.org/home/key-assange-witness-recants-with-zero-corporate-media-coverage/
So, you don’t have an opinion on whether it was a smart move by him?
May 13th, 2023 - 05:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Fair enough.
“So, you don’t have an opinion”
May 14th, 2023 - 01:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0Hardly germane to what Lula stated.
You have conceded that Siggi the Hacker’, is absolutely relevant to the question at hand?
I’ll take that as a no then.
May 14th, 2023 - 02:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I concede nothing of the kind, exactly what difference has ‘Siggi the Hacker’s’ epiphany moment made???
The fool Assange is still banged up, still going to be extradited (eventually) and still going to get a trillion year sentence.
How exactly is ‘Siggi’s road to Damascus’ germane to Assange’s situation???
Hasn’t altered anything one iota.
“I concede nothing of the kind, exactly what difference has ‘Siggi the Hacker’s’ epiphany moment made???”
May 14th, 2023 - 06:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“A key witness in the Department of Justice’s case against Julian Assange has admitted that his entire testimony is false, a revelation that could be the death knell for US attempts to prosecute the Wikileaks founder.
Sigurdur Ingi Thordarson, often known as “Siggi the Hacker,” made the confession to Icelandic outlet Stundin (6/26/21) last weekend. The article details how Thordarson, a convicted felon, pedophile and diagnosed sociopath, used his position to steal money from Wikileaks, and received immunity from prosecution from the FBI in a quid pro quo.
https://fair.org/home/key-assange-witness-recants-with-zero-corporate-media-coverage/
https://en.mercopress.com/2023/05/05/brazil-hosts-unasur-summit-to-relaunch-regional-integration/comments#comment525958
May 15th, 2023 - 12:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0Well, yes I have given my take on the situation, which is of course up for debate, however I notice you haven’t answered a single point I have made!!!
No matter.
As for ‘I`m persuaded by qualified legal opinions’, exactly what is it that you are ‘persuaded’ to believe’? By these ‘qualified legal opinions’?
That you believe him to be innocent, which of course is ‘based on your personal opinion or feelings’.
Or are you suggesting that the ‘Siggi the Hacker’s’ epiphany moment, has led to a change in the situation, whereby the charges will be dropped or he will be acquitted???
Legally speaking, ‘the fool Assange is still banged up, still going to be extradited (eventually) and still going to get a trillion year sentence’.
Or, he could have gone back to Sweden, faced the music and been a freeman by now.
Go Figure.
“You believe him to be innocent, which of course is ‘based on your personal opinion”
May 15th, 2023 - 11:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0Which is based on ”Barack Obama’s (Who is a professor of constitutional law) Justice Department called this the “New York Times problem,” because if WikiLeaks and Assange were criminals for publishing classified information, the New York Times would be just as guilty.“
And
Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote: “In short, the First Amendment does not ‘belong’ to any definable category of persons or entities: It belongs to all who exercise its freedoms.”
And
Apparently, the only witness “A key witness in the Department of Justice’s case against Julian Assange has admitted that his entire testimony is false, a revelation that could be the death knell for US attempts to prosecute the Wikileaks founder.Sigurdur Ingi Thordarson, ”
Ok, so why is he still being extradited then??? Clearly these arguments do not stand up in court, either side of the Atlantic.
May 15th, 2023 - 03:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And why is it still odds on that he will be convicted (eventually).
You quote all these legal opinions saying he is clearly innocent, but the legal system continues to prosecute him.
But don’t worry, if what you say is true then when it eventually does get to court, he will be acquitted.
I wouldn’t bet on in though, because if what you say were true, then he wouldn’t still be being extradited, would he?
It’s called a reality check, what is actually happening, not what you think should happen.
“Clearly these arguments do not stand up in court, either side of the Atlantic.”
May 15th, 2023 - 07:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There have only been proceedings on one side of the Atlantic.
“Odds on that he will be convicted”
Of what pray?
“A key witness in the Department of Justice’s case against Julian Assange has admitted that his entire testimony is false, a revelation that could be the death knell for US attempts to prosecute the Wikileaks founder.“
”If what you say were true, then he wouldn’t still be being extradited”
Do you live under a rock or what?
There are scores of miscarriages justice occurring every day, everywhere.
We don`t have to look any further than Lula.
He has been charged, indicted and an arrest warrant issued in the US, so that has been before a grand jury to indict and a court to issue the arrest warrant, before an extradition request can be issued.
May 16th, 2023 - 11:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And the extradition request is currently before the courts in the UK.
‘Clearly these arguments do not stand up in court, either side of the Atlantic’.
The main charge seems to be espionage, given he had illegal information and knowingly passed it on, would seem to be a ‘slam dunk’.
‘a revelation that could be the death knell for US attempts to prosecute the Wikileaks founder’.
Errr, but it hasn’t been, has it???
Push the ‘reality check’ button.
These ‘qualified legal opinions’ you quote, have had no effect whatsoever on the legal process, so far at least.
Lula, ‘miscarriage’, didn’t know he was pregnant, he certainly wasn’t innocent.
“So that has been before a grand jury to indict”
May 17th, 2023 - 12:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0Which is simply an 'ex parte' application in which the prosecution lays out its unchallenged assertions, so an indictment is foregone conclusion.
“The main charge seems to be espionage, given he had illegal information”
He did, but only as journalist.
Which is based on “Barack Obama’s (Who is a professor of constitutional law) Justice Department called this the “New York Times problem,” because if WikiLeaks and Assange were criminals for publishing classified information, the New York Times would be just as guilty.“
And
Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote: “In short, the First Amendment does not ‘belong’ to any definable category of persons or entities: It belongs to all who exercise its freedoms.”
And
Apparently, the only witness “A key witness in the Department of Justice’s case against Julian Assange has admitted that his entire testimony is false, a revelation that could be the death knell for US attempts to prosecute the Wikileaks founde. Sigurdur Ingi Thordarson, ”
You need to read the whole sentence, not just bits of it, if you are to understand what is being said.
May 18th, 2023 - 12:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0i.e. ‘so that has been before a grand jury to indict and a court to issue the arrest warrant, before an extradition request can be issued.’
The Grand Jury indict, but the court issues the arrest warrant, only then can an extradition request be made.
‘the court issues the arrest warrant’, in this case ‘United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia’.
Hence, ‘clearly these arguments do not stand up in court, either side of the Atlantic’, ‘qualified legal opinions’ notwithstanding.
Doesn’t matter in what capacity you possess classified material, the mere act of possession is illegal and passing it on is espionage, no if or buts, a slam dunk.
Once again, push the ‘reality check’ button.
These ‘qualified legal opinions’ you quote again and again, are clearly having no effect whatsoever on the legal process and show no signs of doing so any time soon.
Clever Julian is still banged up and on his way to a trillion year sentence.
Is the undeniable reality here.
“These ‘qualified legal opinions’ you quote again and again, are clearly having no effect whatsoever on the legal process and show no signs of doing so any time soon”
May 18th, 2023 - 10:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0“The indictment breaks all legal precedents. No publisher has ever been prosecuted for disclosing national secrets since the founding of the nation more than two centuries ago,” wrote journalism professor Mark Feldstein in his testimony on behalf of the defense. “The belated decision to disregard this 230-year-old precedent and charge Assange criminally for espionage was not an evidentiary decision but a political one.”
https ://www.wired.com/story/julian-assange-us-extradition-case/
The US government may not wish to open this can of worms
“Executive Privilege; ArtII.S3.4.3 The State Secrets Privilege
Article II, Section 3:
In civil cases, the government may invoke the state secrets privilege to ensure the government is not forced to reveal military or other secrets. By contrast, in criminal cases, the Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant compulsory process to obtain witnesses, and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment guarantees access to relevant exculpatory information in possession of the prosecution.1 Generally speaking, when a judicial order directs the prosecution to provide information to a defendant that the prosecution does not wish to make available, the prosecution has the option of dropping the prosecution to avoid disclosure ” https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-2/section-3/the-state-secrets-privilege
‘The indictment breaks all legal precedents’: but they have done it nonetheless!
May 18th, 2023 - 10:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0‘No publisher has ever been prosecuted for disclosing national secrets’: well they are prosecuting one now!
‘charge Assange criminally for espionage was not an evidentiary decision but a political one’: either way they have still done it!
‘ensure the government is not forced to reveal military or other secrets’: Err, they don’t have to worry about that, Clever Julian has already done that for them!
As I said, push the ‘reality check’ button.
These ‘qualified legal opinions’ you quote (ad infinitum, ad nauseam), are simply having no effect whatsoever on the legal process.
Clearly these arguments do not stand up in court, either side of the Atlantic.
Clever Julian is still banged up and on his way to a trillion year sentence.
Isn't he!
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!