User talk:NSH001/Sources on Assange

 Sources on Assange  (only a start; this is going to be a very long list):


 * Also available at caitlinjohnstone.com. Lengthy (Medium says it will take you 73mins to read, not counting the 112mins of video embedded there) but it's far and away the best overall survey of the topic I've seen.
 * The excellent Caitlin Johnstone's work on Assange isn't restricted to her tour de force above, far from it. Here's some more:
 * On similarities between the US's nefarious activities in Brazil and the Assange case. Also available at caitlinjohnstone.com
 * More quotes:
 * "Ever notice how there are no "Don't Free Assange" rallies? No "Extradite Assange" activist forums? That's because the only normal human beings interested in his case want him free. It's the Free Assange crowd versus the "Thinking about that will cause me cognitive dissonance" crowd. The only grassroots energy regarding Assange is on his side. The entire other side of the debate is (A) governments and their lackeys and (B) the propagandized masses who have been manipulated into staying silent and compliant as the empire works its will."
 * "Debunking smears is all well and good, but the actual Assange case isn't about smears, it's about a question: Should journalists be punished for exposing war crimes?"
 * "Per the Assange extradition argument the Saudis should be allowed to extradite and behead anyone who practices blasphemy."
 * (sub-list to be continued)
 * Gabe Rottman, "Special Analysis of the May 2019 Superseding Indictment of Julian Assange". Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. 30 May 2019.
 * Imperialism on Trial - Free Julian Assange event (Part 1 of 2). Held on 11 June 2019 at "the Crypt on the Green", the crypt of St James's Church, Clerkenwell, London. A part-transcript of the two events, courtesy of Catherine Brown, can be read here. List of speakers follows; links go directly to the start of each speaker's contribution.
 * General introduction to the "Imperialism on Trial" events by Greg Sharkey (organiser) 2:26min.
 * Chris Hedges 17:12mins
 * Catherine Brown Mercouris 16:35mins
 * Fidel Narvéez (Consul at the Ecuadorian embassy in London 2010–2018) 23:00mins
 * Vivienne Westwood 22:03mins
 * Lauri Love 34:55mins. Horrifying Kafka-esque process of how the USA tried to extradite him, and how he succeeded in resisting. A very moving story.
 * Chris Hedges (again!) 12:27mins
 * Tommy McKearney (former hunger striker in NI) 24:27mins
 * John Wight (Scottish journalist) 15:48mins
 * Ahmed Kaballo (journalist at Press TV) 20:11
 * Imperialism on Trial - Free Julian Assange event (Part 2 of 2). Held on 12 June 2019 at St James's Church, Clerkenwell, this time in the main church, not the crypt where the 11 June event was held.
 * Intro by Greg Sharkey (organiser)
 * George Galloway 12:46mins
 * Alexander Mercouris 29:15mins. Good debunking of the US indictment against Assange.
 * Ogmundur Jonasson (Former Interior Minister of Iceland.) 15:13mins
 * Patrick Henningsen 28:30mins
 * Neil Clark 12:25mins
 * Tommy McKearney 21:31mins
 * Clare Daly from Ireland, now an MEP, formerly an MP 16:35mins
 * Chris Hedges 17:34mins
 * - the case management hearing at Westminster Magistrates Court on Monday, 21 October 2019. My comments:
 * It is clear from Murray's description that Lenin Moreno's government, probably under instruction from the US government, has first of all been trying to persuade Assange to leave the embassy of his own volition, and the measures used in attempting to achieve this include the denial, or severe restriction, of food (hence Assange's rapid weight loss). Although these methods failed in that aim, they have still served the important function of applying psychological torture to Assange.
 * More worrying is that the British government is continuing to apply this torture. Even the worst murderers and terrorists being held in UK prisons are fed an adequate diet, but not Assange, since he has failed to regain the weight lost in the embassy.
 * Moreover, the British government have been using medication which, together with the other torture techniques, are destroying Assange's brain and mental capacity. As Murray writes: "But his physical appearance was not as shocking as his mental deterioration. When asked to give his name and date of birth, he struggled visibly over several seconds to recall both", adding later on: "To see my friend, the most articulate man, the fastest thinker, I have ever known, reduced to that shambling and incoherent wreck, was unbearable."
 * John Hilley, "Media persecution of Assange and BBC News at Ten's repeated reporting 'errors'", Zenpolitics, 23 October 2019.
 * John Pilger, "Did This Happen in the Home of the Magna Carta?", Consortium News. 25 October 2019.
 * "Assange Is The Only One To Abide By The Law", Raul Ilargi Meijer, Zero Hedge, 25 October 2019.
 * "The parading into a courtroom of Julian Assange in London was all the evidence one could need that the UK government breaks its own laws as well as numerous international laws, with impunity. But that is not how the media reported on it, if it did at all."
 * "He [Assange] doesn't fight the law, he fights the lawless [who are] posing as the law."
 * " And then Monday in court, a British court, it was a bunch of Americans who openly decided what should happen"
 * "If you live in Britain and you think Brexit is a more important issue than Assange, you're delusional. Nothing is more important to anyone in a society than a government torturing a man to death in broad daylight, a man who moreover has not broken a single law. We don't even torture mass murderers, terrorists or child rapists to death anymore, at least not at home. But Julian Assange IS treated that way. And whether the UK will be a part of Europe or not, that is the country it has become. A lawless medieval banana republic."
 * Further comments from Maurizi: "2. As a journalist heavily targeted by #UCGlobal which spied on my convos, unscrewed my phones, spied on ALL my electronic devices, it's crucial to make UC Global and the #USintelligence accountable"
 * Craig Murray on Assange: "Swedes should be ashamed of the way they've been played by the CIA", 6:08mins. RT.com. Interview, 19 November 2019.
 * "Abby Martin on Julian Assange, Coup in Bolivia, Bernie Sanders & Gaza" 50:55mins, AcTVism Munich. 21 November 2019.
 * Some interesting literary allusions in this piece.
 * Doctors for Assange, "Concerns of medical doctors about the plight of Mr Julian Assange", medium.com, 25 November 2019.
 * "60+ doctors warn Assange 'could die in prison'. UK & Australia governments do nothing". The Duran, 26 November 2019.
 * Julian Assange Free the Truth event at St Pancras New Church, 28 November 2019. An excellent written report, from Catherine Brown, can be found here.
 * Lisa Longstaff, Women Against Rape, "gives a powerful speech on government weaponising rape to witch-hunt Assange for Wikileaks exposure of war crimes, rape and torture" 13:09mins. "But the pursuit of Julian Assange is not about rape – it's the US government weaponising and distorting rape in order to punish him for the Wikileaks exposés on war crimes, rape and torture. ... It's unlike any other rape investigation we've seen anywhere ... In his case, the judicial process was corrupted from the beginning."
 * Lissa Johnson, "You can't adequately medically treat a torture victim while continuing to torture them" 7:21mins. "Julian has been showing symptoms typical for someone exposed to a prolonged period of psychological torture. ... the doctors know that that is very serious physically for Julian Assanges's life and survival".
 * Craig Murray, "We live in what has become a rogue state!" 14:34mins.
 * John Pilger describes his HMP Belmarsh visit to Julian Assange earlier today. 14:09 mins
 * Nils Melzer, "I am extremely concerned for his life" - Nils Melzer describes Assange's "Psychological Torture" 16:17mins.
 * Mark Curtis, "Historian: Corbyn's media treatment 'The biggest propaganda campaign since the war'" 12:15
 * John Pilger, "Visiting Britain's Political Prisoner". Consortium News. Volume 25, Number 333. 29 November 2019.
 * "Two months before Assange's extradition hearing, RSF calls for his release on humanitarian grounds and for US Espionage Act charges to be dropped", Reporters without Borders, 24 December 2019. "Reporters Without Borders (RSF) is alarmed by reports that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange's health has deteriorated in detention, and calls for his immediate release on humanitarian grounds. RSF condemns the continued targeting of Assange for his journalistic-like activities, which sets a dangerous precedent."
 * Nils Melzer, "[BBC&#93; says #Assange 'evaded justice'…". Melzer debunking BBC's claim (incidentally, illustrating why the BBC is not a reliable source on this issue). 13 January 2020.
 * Julian Assange speech that was censored by the Oxford Union 21:03mins. 1 February 2013.
 * Prisoners' revolt and pressure from legal team and campaigners forces Belmarsh to move Assange out of solitary.
 * WikiLeaks statement: "In a dramatic climbdown, authorities at Belmarsh Prison have moved Julian Assange from solitary confinement in the medical wing and relocated him to an area with other inmates. The move is a huge victory for Assange's legal team and for campaigners who have been insisting for weeks that the prison authorities must end the punitive treatment of assange. But the decision to relocate Assange is also a massive victory of prisoners in Belmarsh. A group of inmates have petitioned the prison governor on three occasions, insisting that the treatment of Assange was unjust and unfair. After meetings between prisoners, lawyers and the Belmarsh authorities, Assange was moved to a different prison wing albeit one with only 40 inmates. But there remain serious concerns about Julian Assange's treatment in Belmarsh. He is still being denied adequate access to his lawyers as even the judge recognised at a case management hearing in Westminster Magistrates' Court. And campaigners continue to insist that Assange should not be in prison at all, least of all in Belmarsh high security prison. But all that notwithstanding this is an important victory for the campaigners outside and inside the prison walls." - Joseph Farrell, Wikileaks Ambassador. 24 January 2020.
 * still doesn't have proper access to lawyers, nor exercise, nor proper medical care, nor facilities to prepare his defence
 * I fear this will make it easier for him to be "Epstein"-ed, which may be the underlying reason for the apparent concession. I hope not, but it's impossible to overstate the malignant evil of the bastards responsible for this outrage.
 * A series of 5 articles by Lissa Johnson on "The Psychology Of Getting Julian Assange":
 * "Part 1: What's Torture Got To Do With It?", newmatilda.com, 23 February 2019."In the first part of a special New Matilda investigative series, clinical psychologist Dr Lissa Johnson exposes the 'science' behind the hunt for Julian Assange, and the tactics those in power use to keep you in the dark."
 * "Part 2: The Court Of Public Opinion And The Blood-Curdling Untold Story", newmatilda.com, 25 February 2019."In her ongoing special investigation into the detention of Julian Assange, Dr Lissa Johnson turns to the art of smear, and how to corrupt a judicial system."
 * "Part 3 – Wikileaks and Russiagate: Trust Us, We're The CIA", newmatilda.com, 2 March 2019."In the third of her special investigative series on Julian Assange, clinical psychologist Dr Lissa Johnson sheds a little more light on the ways the world's most consistently dishonest state has co-opted so many otherwise intelligent people into shooting the messenger."
 * "Part 4: Why Even Some Lefties Want To See Him Hang", newmatilda.com, 15 March 2019."Convinced Julian Assange handed Trump the election? Certain he raped two women in Sweden? Want to see him rot in jail? The fourth in a five-part series by clinical psychologist Dr Lissa Johnson explains the science behind smear and propaganda, and how and why it works."
 * "Part 5: War Propaganda 101", newmatilda.com, 25 March 2019."Ever wonder why left wing trolls hate Julian Assange so much? And why maybe you're more questioning? Ever tried to get to the bottom of a government-run propaganda campaign and found your synapses misfiring? The final in a five-part series by clinical psychologist Dr Lissa Johnson explains the science behind smear, and how and why it works."
 * Catherine Brown, "The Perversion of Good Impulses to Negative Ends", 5 December 2019. Some notes on how good people can be manipulated to evil ends. The smears against Assange show this process at work.
 * "Relatively unpopular dictatorships like the Greek colonels don't achieve half as much evil, because they fail to harness half as much good."
 * "Most dangerous of all is the manipulation of the good impulses of the many by the cynicism, or moral madness, of the few."
 * "The impulse to prevent human rights abuses, by states and/or men, is harnessed by political manipulators in support of economic and political imperialism, and wars intended primarily to acquire natural resources and extend military bases at whatever cost to human rights."
 * "The impulse to defend women from male oppression has been harnessed to drain support from Julian Assange on the basis of allegations and investigations which – on inspection – bear very many signs of having been politically motivated."
 * "Character assassination – against Jews, Marie Antoinette, Albert Dreyfus, Julian Assange – invariably appeals to idealism. To the ideals that condemn killing Christian children, committing incest, having multiple mistresses, or committing rape, as wrong. But it avoids appealing to the ideal that someone is innocent until proven guilty. Or that being guilty of one thing – having mistresses – does not prove anyone guilty of another – high treason. Or that weaponization of certain ideals to trample on others should be condemned."
 * Robert Scheer, "The Plot to Discredit and Destroy Julian Assange". Truthdig. 6 December 2019.
 * Interview with a high-quality Swiss online magazine. German-language original here.
 *  If I had to recommend a single source to anyone unfamiliar with the reality of what has happened to Assange , I think this is the best of all the sources I've seen so far: high-quality, well argued, accurate and credible, by an expert in his field.
 * Melzer is fluent in Swedish and has read all the relevant police and legal records, so he is able to give an accurate account regarding the sex allegations in Sweden.
 * Some quotes:
 * Q: "Julian Assange, they say, fled the Swedish judiciary in order to avoid being held accountable." A: "That's what I always thought, until I started investigating. The opposite is true. Assange reported to the Swedish authorities on several occasions because he wanted to respond to the accusations. But the authorities stonewalled."
 * "The willful malevolence of the authorities only became apparent when they immediately disseminated the suspicion of rape via the tabloid press, and did so without questioning A. A. and in contradiction to the statement given by S. W. It also violated a clear ban in Swedish law against releasing the names of alleged victims or perpetrators in sexual offense cases."
 * Q: "Why were the British so eager to prevent the Swedes from closing the case?" A: "We have to stop believing that there was really an interest in leading an investigation into a sexual offense." [Read the source for the full explanation]
 * 2 hour 8:20min podcast.
 * Starts with some good music and a one-hour interview with Melzer, which clarifies some points in the previous item. Quote starting at approx 1hr 7min (slightly edited): "Don't look for the light somewhere else, just switch it on in yourself and show the world that the light that you can shine on it you know, give an example in your own life, that's what I tell my students: don't look for the light elsewhere, just switch it on and there shall be a light, and the good thing, when everything becomes dark – it can be in the biggest, darkest, blackest room – if you light just one candle, the darkness is gone."
 * Nils Melzer, Formal letter to UK Govt (via UN Ambassador) re Assange case, 29 October 2019. Page 6: "While the practical implementation of procedural rights allows for, and requires, a reasonable margin of judicial interpretation, no objective observer can escape the conclusion that Mr. Assange's due process rights have been seriously, consistently and deliberately violated in every phase of each judicial proceeding conducted against him in all involved jurisdictions." (emphasis added) Note also the 4 months+ delay in the UK Govt's response to the UN Special Rapporteur's initial inquiry.
 * Another Julian Assange Free the Truth event at St Pancras New Church, this time on 3 February 2020.
 * Craig Murray, 11:37mins mainly from the perspective of a whistleblower, referring to Clive Ponting's case, and the ongoing destruction of civil rights in the UK
 * Nils Melzer, "Abuse of International Law". 21:04 mins.
 * Eva Joly, 11:22mins.
 * Lisa Longstaff from Women Against Rape, 9:10mins. Extraordinary contrast between Assange, and the appalling reality for most rape victims in the UK: "so you can't tell us the UK government cares about rape".
 * John Shipton (Assange's father), a personal speech. 5:37mins.
 * Appeal by 130 prominent Germans:
 * Media Lens, "'Burned At The Stake' – The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Demolishes The Fake Claims Targeting Julian Assange", 13 February 2020.
 * Daniel Ellsberg, 1:22mins. Introduction (by video).
 * Jennifer Robinson (by video), 1:33mins. Barrister in Assange's UK legal team.
 * James C. Goodale, 9:21mins. Former general counsel to the NYT, who fought for the NYT's right to publish the Pentagon Papers.
 * Noam Chomsky & Daniel Ellsberg 4:20mins (video excerpt)
 * Renata Ávila 10:26mins human rights lawyer, member of Assange's US defense team: "Feminists attacking him never mention anything about him raising his son as a single father."
 * Glen Ford (editor and founder of the Black Agenda Report) 8:32mins
 * Jackie Walker 4:34mins. "The person who has really fine character".
 * Max Blumenthal 15:20mins
 * Noam Chomsky (video interview) 3:38mins
 * Q&A session 47mins
 * Also available on johnpilger.com.
 * Supplementary material, including a list of signatories, and links to Meltzer's correspondence with the US, UK and Swedish governmants
 * Video of the "Don't Extradite Assange" (DEA) demo on Saturday 22 February 2020. 193mins. Speeches in Parliament Square:
 * John Shipton, Julian Assange's father
 * Deepa Govindarajan Driver, University and College Union
 * Tim Dawson, National Union of Journalists and International Federation of Journaalists
 * 3mins Vivienne Westwood, designer and activist
 * 2mins Kristinn Hrafnsson, editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks
 * 10mins Roger Waters, songwriter, Pink Floyd co-founder. Waters didn't have enough time to read his full speech, but the full text can be read here.
 * 5mins Tariq Ali, New Left Review editorial committee
 * 3mins Lindsey German, convenor of Stop the War Coalition
 * 5mins Brian Eno, musician and human rights activist, president of Stop the War Coalition
 * 6mins Yanis Varoufakis, Greek MP, DiEM25 co-founder
 * 5mins Lowkey, Scottish rapper and social commentator
 * 4mins Craig Murray, whistleblower, former British Ambassador
 * Leigh's  has been known about for years, but obviously not well enough to prevent the usual warmongering liars from smearing Assange by falsely claiming that Assange recklessly endangered thousands of lives by publishing unredacted files. Klarenberg's article makes clear why Mark Davis is right to say that "The Guardian and New York Times betrayed Julian Assange in 2010, and have played a pivotal and consciously dishonest role in smearing him ever since."
 * There is some more info about what probably happened at Prabir Purkayastha, "Leigh vs. Assange: Goof Meets the Geek", NEWSClick, 26 September 2011.
 * (more to be added to this sublist, dating from around 2011)
 * personal comment: I grew up to the constant refrain from my father (who was a scientist) complaining about the incompetence and stupidity of arts graduates trying to manage a science- and engineering-based company such as ICI, the largest industrial company in the UK at the time. Now I don't know whether Leigh is, or is not, an arts graduate: if he is, then that tends to confirm my father's low opinion of arts graduates; if not, then he should have known better. (FWIW, Leigh's co-author Luke Harding is indeed an arts graduate.) Klarenberg's article does confirm the lack of "clue" among Guardian journalists.
 * Note also this quote from Klarenberg: "Simultaneously, Assange himself was also growing increasingly anxious, in his case about the identities of informants and other individuals featured in the logs being revealed — no effort had been made by Guardian journalists to remove a single one, and despite repeated requests he wasn't provided with staff or technical support to redact them. As a result, the WikiLeaks chief took up the "moral responsibility" for the files — his requests for publication to be delayed in order to give him enough time to adequately "cleanse" the documents were ignored, so he was compelled to "literally work all night" to redact around 10,000 names, Davis said."
 * See also for information revealed by the court case.
 * Caitlin Johnstone, "We're Asking One Question In Assange's Case: Should Journalists Be Punished For Exposing War Crimes?". 23 February 2020."And you know what? I think the power behind his &#91;Melzer's&#93; testimony comes from the fact that he realized that he had been duped, and if he, a very intelligent, well read, worldly, informed and educated person could be duped, then anyone can be. No one is immune. Human minds are hackable. We're all very busy with our lives. We're all kept busy by capitalism, and very few of us have the time to do what he did and sit down and take a look at the facts and assess them. And even if they did that, even fewer of them have had the courage of their convictions to put up with the social consequences of changing course. Being manipulated isn't immoral, being a manipulator is. People feel ashamed when they've been conned, but it's not their fault; it's always the fault of the con man. That's why fraud is the crime, and being defrauded is being a victim of that crime."
 * The following written legal submissions are all headed "In the Westminster Magistrates' Court: Government of USA v Julian Assange".
 * Morning and afternoon case reports (short summaries) by Bridges for Media Freedom:
 * Day 1: Morning
 * Day 1: Afternoon
 * Day 1: Photos
 * Day 2: Morning
 * Day 2: Afternoon
 * Day 2: Photos
 * Day 3: Morning
 * Day 3: Afternoon
 * Day 3: Photos
 * Day 4: Morning [not available]
 * Day 4: Afternoon
 * Imperialism on Trial - Free Julian Assange event at St Pancras New Church, London. 25 February 2020. The opening few speakers are all worth watching, not so sure about the later panel discussion. A part transcript by Catherine Brown is available here.
 * with contributions from Renata Ávila, Suelette Dreyfus, Mary Kostakidis, Fidel Narváez, Angela Richter, John Pilger, Konstantin Rozhkov, John Shipton, Johannes Wahlström
 * some useful info on how the psychological torture of Assange began after the change of government in Ecuador; in addition to restricting visits and cutting off telephone and internet access, it also included denying food (hence his weight loss) and even "forgetting" toilet paper
 * A long article confirming how Julian Assange is being tortured. Also compares how he is being mistreated with the relatively mild, and respectful, treatment accorded – in contrast to Assange – to some real, genuine convicted criminals being held at Belmarsh, the worst and most violent offenders, including rapists, murderers and terrorists.
 * (Day 1 = Monday 24 February 2020) More on the second iteration of the kangaroo court. Quotes:
 * "Extradition hearings are not held at Belmarsh Magistrates Court inside Woolwich Crown Court. They are always held at Westminster Magistrates Court as the application is deemed to be delivered to the government at Westminster. Now get your head around this. This hearing is at Westminster Magistrates Court. It is being held by the Westminster magistrates and Westminster court staff, but located at Belmarsh Magistrates Court inside Woolwich Crown Court. All of which weird convolution is precisely so they can use the "counter-terrorist court" to limit public access and to impose the fear of the power of the state."
 * "[District Judge Vanessa] Baraitser of course is but a puppet, being supervised by Chief Magistrate Lady Arbuthnot, a woman so enmeshed in the defence and security service establishment I can conceive of no way in which her involvement in this case could be more corrupt."
 * "There was a separate media entrance and a media room with live transmission from the courtroom, and there were so many scores of media I thought I could relax and not worry as the basic facts would be widely reported. In fact, I could not have been more wrong. I followed the arguments very clearly every minute of the day, and not a single one of the most important facts and arguments today has been reported anywhere in the mainstream media."
 * My comment: a good example of why 
 * "[prosecuting counsel] Lewis had thus just flat out contradicted his entire opening statement to the media stating that they need not worry as the Assange charges could never be applied to them. And he did so straight after the adjournment, immediately after his team had handed out copies of the argument he had now just completely contradicted. I cannot think it has often happened in court that a senior lawyer has proven himself so absolutely and so immediately to be an unmitigated and ill-motivated liar. Yet remarkably I cannot find any mention anywhere in the mainstream media that this happened at all."
 * My comment: need to read the preceding paragraphs in the source to understand this fully, but they are too long to quote here. Again, this illustrates how unreliable some so-called "reliable sources", in some circumstances, really are.
 * plus a lot more worth reading. Note particularly that the breach of lawyer-client confidentiality, on its own, would normally be sufficient grounds for the case to be summarily dismissed.
 * Day 2 (Tuesday 25 February) at the kangaroo court
 * On Day 2, Assange's lawyers made a statement that on the previous day (Day 1), (quoting Marray) "Julian had twice been stripped naked and searched, eleven times been handcuffed, and five times been locked up in different holding cells. On top of this, all of his court documents had been taken from him by the prison authorities, including privileged communications between his lawyers and himself, and he had been left with no ability to prepare to participate in today's proceedings."
 * my comment. This harassment is completely unnecessary, firstly because Assange is a peaceful person who has committed no crime, and secondly, in an environment as secure as Belmarsh there is no possibility of Assange hiding anything illegal. It is part of a deliberate torture programme, and has nothing to do with security.
 * When asked to intervene with the prison authorities, District Judge Baraitser refused to do so, claiming she had no jurisdiction. The defence QC, Edward Fitzgerald, replied that in his experience "it was common practice for magistrates and judges to pass on comments and requests to the prison service where the conduct of the trial was affected, and that jails normally listened to magistrates sympathetically." After Fitzgerald had been flatly contradicted by Baraitser, the prosecuting counsel rose to confirm that this was normal practice. Murray comments: "The only realistic explanation that occurs to me is that Baraitser has been warned off, because this continual mistreatment and confiscation of documents is on senior government authority."
 * my comment. Read the source for the full details, especially the sneering and condescending attitude of the judge.
 * The defence then spend 4 hours demolishing the prosecution claims. Of these, the most significant is the claim that Assange knowingly put lives at risk. What actually happened is that  in their book about Wikileaks, published in February 2011. At first Wikileaks said nothing about this blunder, in order to avoid drawing attention to it. But in August 2011, the German weekly newspaper Der Freitag announced that it had the unredacted cables. Meanwhile the US government had been helping, along with others, in the redaction work on the cables; . See Murray's report for more details. The story is expanded in greater detail in Caitlin Johnstone's Debunking The Smear That Assange Recklessly Published Unredacted Documents.
 * More info also available at.
 * Day 3 (Wednesday 26 February) at the kangaroo court
 * Seems to me that the "caricature" description applies to District Judge Vanessa Baraitser's behaviour, as much as it does to the prosecution arguments.
 * Baraitser:
 * "mimics concern" by asking, shortly before a break is due anyway, whether Assange would like a break, and then ignoring his response.
 * tells Assange he can only respond through his lawyers - when he's physically prevented, by the court layout, from doing so; moreover when she's ruled that he cannot even pass notes to his counsel.
 * says Assange is a "danger to the public" (WTF???)
 * In response to Baraitser's ludicrous arguments, even Lewis, the prosecution counsel, comes (partly) to Assange's defence, saying "I really don't think that's right". Murray describes Lewis looking at Baraitser "like a kindly uncle whose favourite niece has just started drinking tequila from the bottle at a family party."
 * Murray then factually outlines the lengthy legal arguments, but see and  for his comments thereon.
 * Day 4 (Thursday 27 February) at the kangaroo court
 * Murray begins by pointing out how a written court transcript can be misleading. Tone of voice and body language is also important. Murray notes, 'All these and the other dozen interruptions were designed to appear to show the judge attempting to clarify the defence's argument in a spirit of intellectual testing. But if you heard the tone of Baraitser's voice, saw her body language and facial expressions, it was anything but. The false picture a transcript might give is exacerbated by the courtly Fitzgerald's continually replying to each obvious harassment with "Thank you Madam, that is very helpful", which again if you were there, plainly meant the opposite.'
 * Murray then examines the legal arguments, particularly the prosecution's contention that the treaty provision [Article 4.1] against extradition for political offences does not apply.
 * Murray writes: "It is intensely embarrassing for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) when an English court repudiates the application of a treaty the UK has ratified with one or more foreign states. For that reason, in the modern world, very serious procedures and precautions have been put into place to make certain that this cannot happen. Therefore the prosecution's argument that all the provisions of the UK/US Extradition Treaty of 2007 are not able to be implemented under the Extradition Act of 2003, ought to be impossible." He then explains, from his own experience, and at length, how the process of ratification works. The treaty is examined in detail by every relevant government department and their lawyers. If changes in UK law are needed to enable operation of the treaty, then these are made, but only after they have gone through the normal processes by which laws are made in the UK. Only then can the treaty be ratified. That's how conflict between domestic law and treaty obligations is avoided. He concludes, "It follows of necessity that There could not be a more gross abuse of process."
 * There is now absolutely no doubt whatsoever that this is a show trial, like the show trials in Eastern Europe or the Soviet Union under Stalin. It is a warning to dissidents not to tell the truth about the crimes and war crimes of powerful people.
 * But it is worse than that: they are deliberately continuing to worsen both his mental and physical health; in other words torture. We know from Melzer that he has already been tortured for years; the point is that the torture is getting worse, and the legal system is doing nothing to stop it.
 * They are hoping that Assange will kill himself before the case goes to appeal at the High Court or the Supreme Court, where it is certain to be thrown out. There are far too many breaches of the law for senior judges to do anything else. Or he might just die anyway: his health has been steadily deteriorating from the torture, and there is a limit to how much torture any one person can stand. Can he really last out until the case gets to the High Court?
 * When I first wrote this, I was unaware that Assange had two small children with Stella Moris (see ). This makes it much less likely that Assange will kill himself, but who knows? Long-term torture (whether physical or psychological) can eventually get bad enough to make anyone want to end it.
 * Reporting on the first week of the kangaroo court; good summary of the main points at stake in this case.
 * with Stefania Maurizi, Investigative journalist; James Ball, global editor at the Bureau of Investigative Journalism; Rebecca Vincent, UK bureau director, Reporters Without Borders; Nils Melzer, UN special rapporteur on torture
 * Mercouris is a lawyer who formerly practised at the High Court. Main points made by Mercouris:
 * The prosecution have already conceded that the offences are political offences. Mercouris was not not expecting them to concede this point so easily, and in his opinion, this is a "big win" for Assange.
 * On the question of the Extradition Treaty vs. the Extradition Act, Mercouris takes a traditional legal view rather than the pragmatic, administrative view taken by Craig Murray, set out with great clarity by the latter in . Nevertheless, the end result is much the same, namely that the prosecution case is very weak.
 * There is a large and well established body of law that the layout of a court is important for a fair trial. Assange has very strong grounds for appeal on this point.
 * Contrary to the position taken by District Judge Baraitser, courts are able to intervene on prison conditions.
 * my comment: Not an ideal source, but this could be helpful when people can see that Assange is a loving father. Worth watching the video where Stella Moris breaks down in tears as she realises that the British state [at the insistence of the United Sates], is now slowly killing her fiancé, having tried for years to break him down and destroy him. Compare and contrast the reaction to Assange's fatherhood to Boris Johnson's philanderings. See for example, this heartless – "excuse me while i [sic&#93; vomit for the foreseeable future" – presstitute at the Guardian.
 * Full video here (11:46mins). "I don't think people understand Julian's extreme situation and pressure that we've been under ... anything can be used against him and has been used against him".
 * "vain and difficult" - Just imagine, dear reader, that you had been confronted with the catastrophic idiocy of the publication, by Guardian journalists, of the password to the unredacted diplomatic cables. Or the lack of "clue" among said journalists (see for details). I'm not surprised that my late father (a scientist) would get so infuriated by  arts-graduate managers at ICI, trying to manage something they didn't have a clue about. Imagine a professor of English literature at Oxford who had never heard of Shakespeare, as an illustration of their level of incompetence and ignorance. (For the avoidance of doubt, this illustration applies equally to said arts-graduate managers and arts-graduate Guardian journalists, when dealing with matters they're not qualified to handle; they may, of course, be perfectly fine when dealing with other matters.)
 * Also available at https://www.pscp.tv/w/1lPJqLazXvLGb?t=32
 * This video is especially valuable because of the contribution from Dale Yates, Reuters bureau chief in Baghdad at the time of the "Collateral Murder" atrocities.
 * Includes a lot more video footage besides the interview. More to be added here.
 * PDF version
 * Supplementary material, giving:
 * General background
 * Pattern of abuses contributing to torture
 * COVID-19 pandemic, and Vanessa Baraitser
 * Call to action
 * References
 * Signatories
 * Timeline
 * But it is worse than that: they are deliberately continuing to worsen both his mental and physical health; in other words torture. We know from Melzer that he has already been tortured for years; the point is that the torture is getting worse, and the legal system is doing nothing to stop it.
 * They are hoping that Assange will kill himself before the case goes to appeal at the High Court or the Supreme Court, where it is certain to be thrown out. There are far too many breaches of the law for senior judges to do anything else. Or he might just die anyway: his health has been steadily deteriorating from the torture, and there is a limit to how much torture any one person can stand. Can he really last out until the case gets to the High Court?
 * When I first wrote this, I was unaware that Assange had two small children with Stella Moris (see ). This makes it much less likely that Assange will kill himself, but who knows? Long-term torture (whether physical or psychological) can eventually get bad enough to make anyone want to end it.
 * Reporting on the first week of the kangaroo court; good summary of the main points at stake in this case.
 * with Stefania Maurizi, Investigative journalist; James Ball, global editor at the Bureau of Investigative Journalism; Rebecca Vincent, UK bureau director, Reporters Without Borders; Nils Melzer, UN special rapporteur on torture
 * Mercouris is a lawyer who formerly practised at the High Court. Main points made by Mercouris:
 * The prosecution have already conceded that the offences are political offences. Mercouris was not not expecting them to concede this point so easily, and in his opinion, this is a "big win" for Assange.
 * On the question of the Extradition Treaty vs. the Extradition Act, Mercouris takes a traditional legal view rather than the pragmatic, administrative view taken by Craig Murray, set out with great clarity by the latter in . Nevertheless, the end result is much the same, namely that the prosecution case is very weak.
 * There is a large and well established body of law that the layout of a court is important for a fair trial. Assange has very strong grounds for appeal on this point.
 * Contrary to the position taken by District Judge Baraitser, courts are able to intervene on prison conditions.
 * my comment: Not an ideal source, but this could be helpful when people can see that Assange is a loving father. Worth watching the video where Stella Moris breaks down in tears as she realises that the British state [at the insistence of the United Sates], is now slowly killing her fiancé, having tried for years to break him down and destroy him. Compare and contrast the reaction to Assange's fatherhood to Boris Johnson's philanderings. See for example, this heartless – "excuse me while i [sic&#93; vomit for the foreseeable future" – presstitute at the Guardian.
 * Full video here (11:46mins). "I don't think people understand Julian's extreme situation and pressure that we've been under ... anything can be used against him and has been used against him".
 * "vain and difficult" - Just imagine, dear reader, that you had been confronted with the catastrophic idiocy of the publication, by Guardian journalists, of the password to the unredacted diplomatic cables. Or the lack of "clue" among said journalists (see for details). I'm not surprised that my late father (a scientist) would get so infuriated by  arts-graduate managers at ICI, trying to manage something they didn't have a clue about. Imagine a professor of English literature at Oxford who had never heard of Shakespeare, as an illustration of their level of incompetence and ignorance. (For the avoidance of doubt, this illustration applies equally to said arts-graduate managers and arts-graduate Guardian journalists, when dealing with matters they're not qualified to handle; they may, of course, be perfectly fine when dealing with other matters.)
 * Also available at https://www.pscp.tv/w/1lPJqLazXvLGb?t=32
 * This video is especially valuable because of the contribution from Dale Yates, Reuters bureau chief in Baghdad at the time of the "Collateral Murder" atrocities.
 * Includes a lot more video footage besides the interview. More to be added here.
 * PDF version
 * Supplementary material, giving:
 * General background
 * Pattern of abuses contributing to torture
 * COVID-19 pandemic, and Vanessa Baraitser
 * Call to action
 * References
 * Signatories
 * Timeline
 * This video is especially valuable because of the contribution from Dale Yates, Reuters bureau chief in Baghdad at the time of the "Collateral Murder" atrocities.
 * Includes a lot more video footage besides the interview. More to be added here.
 * PDF version
 * Supplementary material, giving:
 * General background
 * Pattern of abuses contributing to torture
 * COVID-19 pandemic, and Vanessa Baraitser
 * Call to action
 * References
 * Signatories
 * Timeline
 * Timeline

The main hearing at the Old Bailey
The kangaroo court resumed on 7 September 2020, this time at the Old Bailey.

Leading up to the hearing
The following sources were published in the period leading up to the main hearing at the Old Bailey.

Witnesses' evidence statements (in alphabetical order)

 * (This copy of the witness statement does not contain a signature, or date thereof.)
 * Comment – This statement is evidence that Cryptome published the unredacted cables before Wikileaks did.
 * (This copy of the witness statement does not contain a signature, or date thereof.)
 * Comment – This statement is evidence that Cryptome published the unredacted cables before Wikileaks did.
 * (This copy of the witness statement does not contain a signature, or date thereof.)
 * Comment – This statement is evidence that Cryptome published the unredacted cables before Wikileaks did.
 * (This copy of the witness statement does not contain a signature, or date thereof.)
 * Comment – This statement is evidence that Cryptome published the unredacted cables before Wikileaks did.
 * (This copy of the witness statement does not contain a signature, or date thereof.)
 * Comment – This statement is evidence that Cryptome published the unredacted cables before Wikileaks did.
 * (This copy of the witness statement does not contain a signature, or date thereof.)
 * Comment – This statement is evidence that Cryptome published the unredacted cables before Wikileaks did.
 * (This copy of the witness statement does not contain a signature, or date thereof.)
 * Comment – This statement is evidence that Cryptome published the unredacted cables before Wikileaks did.
 * Comment – This statement is evidence that Cryptome published the unredacted cables before Wikileaks did.

On the main hearing
The following sources report, or comment on, the main hearing at the Old Bailey.
 * Craig Murray's daily court reports (the summaries here are not exhaustive, just the main points):
 * (Day 6 = Monday 7 Septermber 2020)
 * Unlike Belmarsh, Julian Assange was able to communicate freely with his lawyers, but is still behind a glass screen.
 * Only the 5 friends and family of the accused were allowed into the public gallery, which can hold about 40 people. Murray himself was given one of these places by the family.
 * Journalists and others, including John Pilger and Kristin Hrafnsson, editor in chief of Wikileaks were confined to an adjacent courtroom, which had only an inadequate video link. Representatives of Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders and members of the German Federal Parliament were excluded. The latter were eventually admitted following strong protests from the German embassy.
 * (another "WTF" moment from "Vicious Vanessa":) In trying to explain why she had cut off remote access from so many interested parties, Baraitser claimed it was because, unlike the public in the courtroom, she could not control their behaviour.
 * Tension rose in the courtroom when both Baraitser and the prosecution tried to block defence witnesses giving their evidence in open court, arguing that all the witnesses had previously submitted evidence in writing, so it was only necessary to hear the prosecution's cross-examination. The defence lawyers rightly refused to back down; eventually Baraitser compromised by imposing a guillotine of 30mins on each defence witness, when the original schedule was 1 hour 45mins for each witness. Murray commented, "What came over most strongly from this question was the desire of both judge and prosecution to railroad through the extradition with as little of the case against it getting a public airing as possible."
 * A long argument ensued about the US government's extraordinary tactic of replacing the previous indictment with a new superseding indictment (too long to be summarised here – see Murray's report), giving the defence only 6 weeks notice. Baraitser read out a pre-written judgement – taking no account of the lawyers' arguments – that the court should proceed on the basis of the superseding indictment. An "extremely distinguished and well-known lawyer" whom Murray spoke to later confirmed that this was "not normal practice, it was totally outrageous".
 * (Day 7 = Tuesday 8 Septermber 2020)
 * The day began with the evidence of Clive Stafford Smith – see his witness statement at.
 * The afternoon dealt with the evidence of Professor Mark Feldstein – see his witness statement at – continued from the previous day.
 * (Day 8 = Wednesday 9 Septermber 2020)
 * [no substantive hearings on Thursday 10th or Friday 11th because of a suspected possible COVID-19 infection in the prosecution team]
 * (Day 9 = Monday 14 Septermber 2020)
 * (Day 10 = Tuesday 15 Septermber 2020)
 * (Day 11 = Wednesday 16 Septermber 2020)
 * (Day 12 = Thursday 17 Septermber 2020)
 * (Day 13 = Friday 18 Septermber 2020)
 * Note the date. Murray stays up all night writing his reports, publishes them on his blog at an hour when most people are rising from bed, then goes straight to court for the next day's session with little or no sleep, doing this consecutively for the first four days of the week. No surprise that he needs to take a rest over the weekend!
 * (Day 14 = Monday 21 Septermber 2020)
 * (Day 15 = Tuesday 22 Septermber 2020)
 * (Day 16 = Wednesday 23 Septermber 2020)
 * (Day 17 = Thursday 24 Septermber 2020)
 * My comment: This 1-hour interview (+ music) gives some useful background on the court, its atmosphere, the lawyers and, above all, the witnesses. Also, how Murray is managing to keep up such a huge output of detailed, top-quality reporting (about 4,000 words each day).
 * Main points (times are approximate):
 * 6:30: Trial deliberately being held in the "most obscure corner of the building".
 * 9mins: Court officials had registered some 40 human rights groups to have internet access to the proceedings. On the day, Vanessa Baraitser ruled that "in the interests of justice" (WTF?) that these groups should not be allowed to observe.
 * 25mins: Julian is very bright [...] broadly libertarian in many of his values, quite left-wing on issues of social justice, wouldn't call himself a "socialist", his passion is for openness in government, far too much secrecy also in corporations [...] he's a very interesting man, he's good company, very friendly, very easy-going
 * 36mins: devastating ctritique of Gordon Kromberg, upon whose affidavits (all 5 of them!) the prosecution is heavily relying. Probably the best they could come up with, since most officials in the DOJ are against the Assange prosecution on First Amendment grounds.
 * 46mins: On Tom Durkin, a very experienced attorney of high seniority, who explained how things really work in the US legal system, how and why Assange will never get a fair trial in the US. Given a lot of respect by the prosecution, unlike most other witnesses.
 * 48mins: On Daniel Elsberg, who was brilliant, giving evidence starting at 5.30 am his time (California). Elsberg left in far more names than Assange, making clear the nonsense being talked by so-called "liberals" saying "Elsberg good, Assange bad".
 * 50mins: John Goetz, an impressive witness.
 * 53mins: Kerry Schenkman on the Espionage Act. US govt (note: not Schenkman) was claining it could prosecute any journalist under the Espionage Act, if he or she posseses any classified info.
 * (Day 18 = Friday 25 Septermber 2020)
 * (Day 19 = Monday 28 Septermber 2020)
 * (Day 20 = Tuesday 29 Septermber 2020)
 * comment: Lots of horrifying detail about how bad conditions are under SAMs (Special Administrative Measures) in US high-security jails. Important to note the point made by the afternoon witness, Lindsay Lewis. Murray reports that "the conditions of Hamza's incarceration directly breached undertakings made by the US government to the UK magistrates' court and High Court when they made the extradition request. The US had stated his medical needs would be fully assessed, his medical treatment would be adequate, and he was unlikely to be sent to the ADX. None of these had happened." In other words, 
 * (Day 21 = Wednesday 30 Septermber 2020)
 * This report includes a copy of Noam Chomsky's expert report to the court (signed and dated 12 February 2020), together with a closely-typed 9-page report by a witness who asked to remain anonymous, on the illegal bugging of the embassy by the Spanish firm UC Global. Both reports are well worth reading.
 * For more details of the "foul government 'expert' Dr Blackwood" (Nigel Blackwook, based at King's College London), see
 * For more details of the "foul government 'expert' Dr Blackwood" (Nigel Blackwook, based at King's College London), see
 * For more details of the "foul government 'expert' Dr Blackwood" (Nigel Blackwook, based at King's College London), see


 * Twice-daily court reports from Bridges for Media Freedom

Other sources

 * Set up a link to the video i/v with Mark Davis. TO-DO.
 * A good exposition, by a lawyer, of the contradictions in the US case against Assange, and the twists and turns it has been forced to use, esp. the two superseding indictments.
 * Set up a link to the video i/v with Mark Davis. TO-DO.
 * A good exposition, by a lawyer, of the contradictions in the US case against Assange, and the twists and turns it has been forced to use, esp. the two superseding indictments.
 * A good exposition, by a lawyer, of the contradictions in the US case against Assange, and the twists and turns it has been forced to use, esp. the two superseding indictments.

58min documentary on ARD1 (might be by NRD?)
 * https://www.ardmediathek.de/ard/video/Y3JpZDovL2Rhc2Vyc3RlLmRlL3JlcG9ydGFnZSBfIGRva3VtZW50YXRpb24gaW0gZXJzdGVuL2Y1YTcxYmY5LWY5ZTEtNDhiNS1hODRhLWFlYTk4ZjI3OWFmMw/
 * News aggregator site:
 * https://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/Hot+Topics/People+in+the+News/Julian+Assange

Absolute And ArbitrAry power 'How the media is helping to kill Extinction Rebellion and Julian Assange
 * http://coldtype.net/Assets20/PDFs/ColdType213.Medialens. Assange.pdf

After the verdict

 * My comment: This should be compulsory reading for all those (probably affected by the propaganda barrage) who appear to think that Julian is so terrible at a personal level.
 * A damning assessment of James Ball
 * Cited in Johnstone's article
 * Her other articles on ContraSpin are all also worth reading.
 * Essential reading on debunking the Swedish sex allegations (far too much detail to summarise here).
 * [Recorded before the verdict was given.]
 * devastating indictment of Starmer's role
 * A damning assessment of James Ball
 * Cited in Johnstone's article
 * Her other articles on ContraSpin are all also worth reading.
 * Essential reading on debunking the Swedish sex allegations (far too much detail to summarise here).
 * [Recorded before the verdict was given.]
 * devastating indictment of Starmer's role
 * [Recorded before the verdict was given.]
 * devastating indictment of Starmer's role
 * devastating indictment of Starmer's role

General background reading

 * On the Guardian's smear campaign against Assange:
 * long list of articles debunking the Guardian's smears and hit pieces
 * Useful collection of essays on Assange:

Advice
The list above can be daunting; there is far too much to read in one session. I recommend starting with – well written, by an expert who knows what he's talking about, and who covers all the main points. Still quite substantial, but possible to read in one sitting. A top-quality, impeccable source.

The next on the list should be Caitlin Johnstone's superb compilation at. I've put it at the top of my list because it is so good. Probably too long for most people to read in one go; I recommend reading the introduction, then skimming through the rest, but do come back to it from time to time until you've read it all.

Finally, it is not possible to understand the attacks against Assange (both the physical (especially the torture), and the verbal attacks (the propaganda)) without understanding how propaganda operates in nominally democratic countries:
 * Watch this video Noam Chomsky - The 5 Filters of the Mass Media Machine, 2 March 2017. It's only 5 minutes – a little levity, in contrast to the heavy reading above, but a good, easy-to-understand introduction to how the propaganda system works.
 * A worrying modern development of the propaganda system is how good people can be manipulated to evil ends. See Catherine Brown above.
 * Bibliography:
 * The UK edition of Herman and Chomsky's 1988 classic work. Essential reading.
 * Updated version of the classic work.
 * May be easier to appreciate than Herman and Chomsky, as the examples given are much more recent. Oriented towards the UK rather than the US.