Julian Assange Speaks About Clinton Foundation, Arms, ISIS

John Pilger is an experienced Australian journalist interviewing Julian Assange discussing emails, Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, arms deals, ISIS, Saudi Arabia, corporations, government and networks of corruption. This was conducted prior to Donald Trump’s election.

• FBI considered political police.
• He states half the Obama cabinet nominated by representative by Citi Bank.
• Connections to Saudi Arabia intimate.
• It is stated that Libya was Hillary Clintons War, there was 40,000 deaths, jihadists, Isis moved in, european refugee and migrant crisis.  People fleeing.  African destabilisation.
• Trump had the establishment off side – banks, intelligence, arms companies, foreign monies, media united behind Hillary.
• Trump does no represent the upper class.
• Ecuador embassy is surrounded by police, Britain is spending 1.26 million pounds – they use robots, undercover police.  Julian has refugee status.
• If he walked out of embassy he would be arrested, extradited to Sweden likely extradition to the US.
• How he copes he indicates that he is adaptable.  That is how he handled isolation.  He is institutionalised. He hasn’t seen sunlight in a long time.  He doesn’t see his children.
• The UN looked into the situation in formal litigation of him versus Sweden and UK, he has been deprived of freedom. What occurred is not based on laws, he asserts it is illegal abuse.  Sweden is not recognising his asylum.
• He is amazed that the narrative about the situation is not put out publicly in the press as it doesn’t suit the western establishment narrative.  Yes the West has political prisoners, not just him but others.  No state accepts to call the people it is imprisoning political prisoners.
• He states he is not charged with a crime.
• He states the woman said police made it up.
• Ecuador found that he is subject to persecution by the United States.
• Australian Amnesty International asserts that he should not be extradited to the United States as follows:  https://unity4j.com/u4jpramnesty.pdf
• Key points:
  • There are concerns that he would face a real risk of serious human rights violations due to his work with Wikileaks.
  • Violation of his right to freedom of expression;
  • Violation of his right to liberty, arising from any pre-trial detention and/or prison sentence that was imposed on the basis of a prosecution that violated his freedom of expression;
  • Violation of his right to life, if the death penalty were to be available in any proceedings that he might face in the USA;
  • Being held in conditions that violate his rights to humane treatment and respect for his dignity, and potentially his right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

The Australian government from my observations has basically supported the US and UK decisions rather than an inquiry into the leaks and whistle-blower status.  The tension is the relationship between Australia and its traditional allies on the one hand and the public interest in respect of what the leaks has revealed on the other.   Here is an article inclusive of his lawyer Jennifer Robinson (Geoffrey Robertson’s daughter) and Julian Burnside a prominent civil liberties lawyer in Melbourne.  He regards him as providing a public service and revealing unaccountable world secrets. https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/08/02/robi-a02.html

I believe there should be an international mediator/arbiter to resolve the conflict in respect of international law.  Clearly political power given the status of the US and UK is blocking justice occurring.  Is he serving the public interest or breaking international law revealing secrets via hacking.  If hacking is for the public good is this ‘ethical’ or is it a violation?  If it saves lives is it permissible or if it threatens national security is it detrimental. These are the questions that should be tested in a impartial court of law.  These are ethical questions in truth which is hard to determine in courts as laws can be black and white rather than circumstantial, values based and sensitive to human rights.

I am just going to quietly reflect on this, not sure if it is true or not just thoughts coming to me…

• my first thoughts are lies are being told.
• unaccountability is the second as I see covert situations arising.
• power concentrating without checks and balances.
• crimes being hidden (the lines blurred between a culture of covert surveillance in the national interest and war crimes).
• intent feels important.
• the leaks are to make visible what is not, it is about blowing the whistle.
• speaking truth to power.
• revealing cyber realities not only in government but corporations and the public being surveilled without their knowledge.
• who is the enemy?
• the issue of public money makes it important for accountability as a right.
• unchallenged power sees enemies in being challenged.

We are in times where corruption is being made visible.