Bienvenido Brother Julian

Ecuador accepts Wikileaks’ founder’s request for Asylum

BBC | AUGUST 16, 2012

Ecuador has granted asylum to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange two months after he took refuge in its London embassy while fighting extradition from the UK.

It said there were fears Mr Assange’s human rights might be violated.

Foreign minister Ricardo Patino accused the UK of making an “open threat” to enter its embassy to arrest Mr Assange.

Mr Assange took refuge at the embassy in June to avoid extradition to Sweden, where he faces questioning over assault and rape claims, which he denies.

The Australian national said being granted political asylum by Ecuador was a “significant victory” and thanked staff in the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

However, as the Foreign Office insisted the decision would not affect the UK’s legal obligation to extradite him to Sweden, Mr Assange warned: “Things will get more stressful now.”

Announcing Ecuador’s decision, Mr Patino launched a strong attack on the UK for what he said was an “explicit type of blackmail”.

The UK Foreign Office had warned, in a note, that it could lift the embassy’s diplomatic status to fulfil a “legal obligation” to extradite the 41-year-old by using the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987.

That allows the UK to revoke the diplomatic status of an embassy on UK soil, which would potentially allow police to enter the building to arrest Mr Assange for breaching the terms of his bail.

Ecuador’s foreign minister said: “We can’t allow spokespeople from the UK to gleefully say they have been honest when they have threatened us in such a way.”

He referred to the UK’s note as an “open threat” and accused the UK of “basically saying we will beat you savagely if you don’t behave”.

Mr Patino said Ecuador believed Mr Assange’s fears of political persecution were “legitimate”.

He said the country was being loyal to its tradition of protecting those who were vulnerable.

“We trust that our friendship with the United Kingdom will remain intact,” he added.

The announcement was watched live by Mr Assange and embassy staff in a link to a press conference from Quito.

The Foreign Office said it was “disappointed” by the statement issued by Ecuador’s foreign minister.

Read Full Article →

Will they shut the web down to stop Wikileaks?

In a previous article, we entertained the idea that the whole Wikileaks issue would be the perfect event to give the government complete control of the world wide web.  Now, a Wikileaks spokesman suggests this may be the only way to stop the disclosure of more documents.

ABC

The arrest and detention of Julian Assange Tuesday on charges of rape and sexual assault was at the least a convenient development for government leaders who’ve sought ways to contain the leader of the controversial website Wikileaks.

But in an exclusive interview with ABC News’ Jim Sciutto, Wikileaks’ spokesman Kristinn Hrafnsson insisted Assange’s arrest won’t alter the site’s calculated release of thousands of secret government cables, which still continues according to plan. The site published a new slate of cables Wednesday.

“It is not derailing us in any way,” said Hrafnsson, adding that a group of five to six people is running Wikileaks’ operations in Assange’s absence. “This is a turning tide and starting a trend that you can’t really stop unless you want to shut down the Internet.”

Meanwhile, supporters of Assange are saying the timing and nature of the personal allegations against him are more than coincidence – they’re “politically motivated.” And the confluence of recent events gives at least the appearance that could be true.

In mid-August, two Swedish women told prosecutors and news outlets they had each had consensual sex with Assange, but that he didn’t use a condom against their wishes and subsequently refused to get tested for sexually-transmitted disease. Their complaint led to a warrant on charges of sexual molestation.

But now prosecutors allege Assange forcibly raped at least one of the women and sexually assaulted the other — significantly more serious allegations than what investigators initially pursued.

Assange, 39, was formally charged and held without bond in London on one count of rape, two of sexual assault, and one of coercion. He has denied the allegations and insists the sex with both women was consensual.

“Fortunately, the international corralling was successful,” Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said shortly after Assange’s arrest. “Assange has hurt international diplomatic relations and I hope he is questioned and tried as established by law.”

Assange’s brainchild, Wikileaks, is also weathering its most intense attacks to date. The site has been bumped from its servers without notice and mysteriously cut off from key funding sources after PayPal and major credit card companies, Visa and MasterCard, pulled the plug pending “further investigation.”

“We are getting seriously close to censorship in the U.S., and that must surely go against the fundamental values the country is based upon,” said Hrafnsson.

But State Department spokesman PJ Crowley said via Twitter “the U.S. government did not write to PayPal requesting any action regarding #WikiLeaks. Not true.”

Swiss authorities Monday closed a Swiss bank account tied to Assange, freezing tens of thousands of dollars used to fund the Wikileaks operation, his lawyers said.

“It wouldn’t be surprising in the least that Wikileaks and political pressure from the U.S. and other affected governments has at least something to do with the current charges in Sweden,” said American University law professor Stephen Vladeck, an expert in national security and international criminal law. But “whether it’s because of that pressure [that he faces charges] is something I think we can’t know.”

No Charges Yet for Assange Over Wikileaks

The apparent onslaught against Assange comes in spite of the fact that he has not been formally charged by any government for Wikileaks’ activities.

“It may be that what Julian has done is a crime,” said Clay Shirky, an Internet and technology consultant and author, referring to Assange’s role in the dissemination of a massive cache of classified government files. “In that case, the right answer is to bring the case to a trial.”

“The leaders of Myanmar and Belarus, or Thailand and Russia, can now rightly say to us ‘You went after Wikileaks’ domain name, their hosting provider, and even denied your citizens the ability to register protest through donations, all without a warrant and all targeting overseas entities, simply because you decided you don’t like the site,'” he said. Shirky’s comment clearly suggests that governmental pressure may be behind the recent setbacks for Assange.

Attorney General Eric Holder has promised a vigorous investigation and prosecution of those involved with the Wikileaks leak. But Vladeck says the law under which Assange could most likely be tried — the Espionage Act — is “politically and legally fraught,” explaining why government prosecutors have not yet laid out any charges.

“One of the flaws in the Espionage Act is that it draws no distinction between the leaker or the spy and the recipient of the information, no matter how far downstream the recipient is,” Vladeck said. “So there’s no difference in the statute between Assange and someone at home who opens up something that Assange has posted on his website knowing that it’s classified. It’s why this is such a problem.”

Army Private Bradley Manning is alleged to have downloaded vast numbers of secret diplomatic cables and military documents while working as an intelligence analyst, committing the greatest security breach in U.S. history using little more than a memory stick and a Lady Gaga CD.

Wikileaks has pledged to release more than 250,000 documents, most, if not all of which, are believed to have been obtained by Manning. Already the site has published classified military records pertaining to the death toll in Iraq, and secret diplomatic cables about relations with foreign governments.

“In the entire history of the Espionage Act there’s been exactly one case when the government went after someone other than the thief – and that prosecution fell apart,” he said.

Internet 9/11 Courtesy of Staged Wikileaks Disclosures

Is Wikileaks the Internet’s Pearl Harbor? Will Julian Assange and his web operation help bring Martial Law to Cyberspace?

by Zen Gardner

Think about it. Where is this seemingly staged Wikileaks furor taking us? While we participate in digging into the juicy tidbits of information that incriminate just about anybody and everybody, where is it all going?

Julian Assange

Lessons of 9/11

While 9/11 served as a wake up call to those awake and aware enough to see the obvious demolitions and misinformation and resultant “Pearl Harbor” effect, most of the world fell for it. And now people are literally bending over, as in airport ‘screenings’, to the onslaught of police state fascism worldwide. It’s staggering. In fact, it’s Orwellian. The armies, police and private sector are at war with the vague concept of terrorism – an unbeatable enemy in a war that can be drawn out indefinitely and fought in any arena necessary.

And what was the result of this declared war on terrorism? Not a war on terror, but an increase in fear and terror, all to justify the economic, social and political clampdown that has followed.

What will the Wikileaks debacle herald?

You guessed it–the last bastion of freedom of information and expression, a free Internet, will topple. After all, if information is now the enemy, we must carefully police any and every aspect of this dangerous medium–all for the safety and protection of ‘we the people’.

Oh, we’ll still have the Internet, just like you can still fly. You’ll just have to be on the “approved” list, screened, stamped, zapped, mugged and molested if you want to get “on the net”. No biggie. Thanks Julian–job well done.

Warning Signs

#1. Wikileaks—WAY too approved and publicized. Every TV and cable network, press worldwide, official recognition from every level of government. Heck, he even does a TED talk!  Where’s anyone else trying to expose the agenda? Only Julian. Hmmm.

#2. Biggie: This supposed system fighter says the 9/11 truth issue is “a distraction”. Mustn’t step on your bosses’ toes now, should we Julian..  Very suspicious if you ask me.

#3. Wikileaks and Assange’s sketchy background:

The WikiLeaks website first appeared on the Internet in December 2006.[15][16] The site claims to have been “founded by Chinese dissidents, journalists, mathematicians and start-up company technologists, from the US, Taiwan, Europe, Australia and South Africa”.[5] The creators of WikiLeaks have not been formally identified.[17] It has been represented in public since January 2007 by Julian Assange and others. Assange describes himself as a member of WikiLeaks’ advisory board.[18] (Wikipedia)

Also, Assange reportedly wrote for both the New York Times and the Economist which is fishy as well–not a real enlightened or ‘alternative’ mindset. His mysterious persona also plays well to the Wikileaks furtive image so people won’t expect to know too much, which also is very ‘convenient’ for keeping anything hidden.

[NOTE: There doesn’t have to be deliberate, conscious involvement in some agenda on Wikileaks’ part, but it helps. He, they, could be ‘useful idiots’ whose program has been conveniently co-opted by the controllers to serve their purpose. Either way, look for the pattern and the effects.]

#4. Watch the hype: There’s a growing crescendo of anger and hate that is now being whipped up–to the point that Assange is being called a new kind of terrorist–and more disturbingly, and as expected, the comparison is now being drawn between Assange and Bin Laden:

Social Media Leaks Categorize Julian Assange  As the Osama Bin Laden Of The Internet

The founder of WikiLeaks is not only a wanted man by the American authorities, his now infamous Web site

WikiLeaks is also under attack by notorious hackers, while its services are being cut-off by Amazon and EveryDNS.net. Although not officially announced, Julian Assange might be considered today’s public enemy number-one, taking the place of the illusive Osama bin Laden. Not since 9/11 has any one figure reached such notoriety due to what many consider acts against a state.

Like bin Laden, Assange has no permanent address, does not maintain a headquarters, employs only a select few confidants and has taken to hiding in covert areas. Younger than bin Laden, Assange at 39 years-old may be a little more mobile than the 53 year-old, choosing to hopscotch the globe versus hibernating in the mountains of Pakistan and Afghanistan.

While his face resides on the covers of magazines and newspapers around the world, similar to a Wild West ‘Wanted’ poster, little is known about his day-to-day activities. Like bin Laden’s video addresses, while the CIA and other mercenaries are seeking his where-a-bouts, it’s amazing that he still finds ways to release updates justifying his actions. (SOURCE)

Notice also how we’ve been hearing about Wikileaks’ exploits for a few years now, giving us time to make the connection between it and sensational and ‘destructive informational terrorism’. Similarly we heard about Osama through the Yemen and Nairobi attacks being attibuted to him, imprinting his “brand” on the collective mind which led to the foregone phony conclusion that he had masterminded the 9/11 attacks.

Ah, ‘But what about these apparent exposures? Would they attack their own?’

Could all these serious indictments against their own just be a deflecting smokescreen to hide the real purpose? Sure worked last time. So why wouldn’t they risk taking down some of their own to give this psychological operation credibility?

The Tactic Is Very Familiar – Know Your Enemy

First there’s the Hegelian Dialectic – create a problem, provoke a reaction and then implement the pre-planned solution. The staged 9/11 attacks, including the internationally inhabited World Trade Center,  ‘justified’ the ensuing wars and worldwide clampdown on freedoms in the name of ‘security’, including the horrendous Patriot Act that was already written and just waiting for an excuse to be signed and implemented.

Similarly, this attack over the international Internet and drawing in diplomatic communities worldwide by exposing state secrets from a variety of countries will greatly help usher in international measures in the name of ‘security’, probably spearheaded once again by the fascist US government with coinciding EU, Canadian & Australian measures. It’s already under way with the Department of Homeland Security confiscating websites.

All they need is ‘the right incident” to justify bringing on full control. Like “Internet Terrorism”? They just can’t use that term enough now, can they. After all, it’s a war on terror, and “if you’re not for us, you’re for the terrorists.” The ultimate false choice, just like everything else they foist on the human consciousness.

Pretty clever these ol’ boys. It’s in their blood

Those manipulating world events belong to a cult, a brotherhood that hides behind many names and guises, and to which they pledge their absolute loyalty above everything, even their own flesh and blood. Commonly referred to as the Illuminati, this cult has an agenda they work to fulfill using certain rituals, methods and tactics.

One of their central themes and modus operandums is “Ordo Ab Chao”– order out of chaos. Create the chaos, pitting anyone against anyone while controlling and fomenting both sides–hence the double headed red phoenix symbol– for any reason, even killing or exposing their own, to create an illogical madness that they think only they can see through and understand. All the while they are manipulating world governments, banks, armies and corporate leaders and drawing the net on the outcome they have already planned.

Fear and confusion is the climate they love to foment. As long as there’s a confused and uninformed populace, the ignorant and fearful masses will be crying out for help from the ‘powers that be’ – the very “powers that be” that caused all the problems in the first place.

They’re not out to help, they’re out to control. At any cost, by any means necessary.

 

The Wikileaks Intelligence Operation

By F. William Engdahl

Since the dramatic release of a US military film of a US airborne shooting of unarmed journalists in Iraq, Wiki-Leaks has gained global notoreity and credibility as a daring website that releases sensitive material to the public from whistleblowers within various governments. Their latest “coup” involved alleged leak of thousands of pages of supposedly sensitive documents regarding US informers within the Taliban in Afghanistan and their ties to senior people linked to Pakistan’s ISI military intelligence. The evidence suggests however that far from an honest leak, it is a calculated disinformation to the gain of the US and perhaps Israeli and Indian intelligence and a coverup of the US and Western role in drug trafficking out of Afghanistan.

Since the posting of the Afghan documents some days ago the Obama White House has given the leaks credibility by claiming further leaks pose a threat to US national security. Yet details of the papers reveals little that is sensitive. The one figure most prominently mentioned, General (Retired) Hamid Gul, former head of the Pakistani military intelligence agency, ISI, is the man who during the 1980’s coordinated the CIA-financed Mujahideen guerilla war in Afghanistan against the Soviet regime there. In the latest Wikileaks documents, Gul is accused of regularly meeting Al Qaeda and Taliban leading people and orchestrating suicide attacks on NATO forces in Afghanistan.

The leaked documents also claim that Osama bin Laden, who was reported dead three years ago by the late Pakistan candidate Benazir Bhutto on BBC, was still alive, conveniently keeping the myth alove for the Obama Administration War on Terror at a point when most Americans had forgotten the original reason the Bush Administration allegedly invaded Afghanistan to pursue the Saudi Bin Laden for the 9/11 attacks.

Demonizing Pakistan?

The naming of Gul today as a key liaison to the Afghan “Taliban” forms part of a larger pattern of US and British recent efforts to demonize the current Pakistan regime as a key part of the problems in Afghanistan. Such a demonization greatly boosts the position of recent US military ally, India. Furthermore, Pakistan is the only muslim country possessing atomic weapons. The Israeli Defense Forces and the Israeli Mossad intelligence agency reportedly would very much like to change that. A phoney campaign against the politically outspoken Gul via Wikileaks could be part of that geopolitical effort.

The London Financial Times says Gul’s name appears in about 10 of roughly 180 classified US files that allege Pakistan’s intelligence service supported Afghan militants fighting Nato forces. Gul told the newspaper the US has lost the war in Afghanistan, and that the leak of the documents would help the Obama administration deflect blame by suggesting that Pakistan was responsible. Gul told the paper, “I am a very favourite whipping boy of America. They can’t imagine the Afghans can win wars on their own. It would be an abiding shame that a 74-year-old general living a retired life manipulating the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan results in the defeat of America.”

Notable, in light of the latest Afghan Wikileaks documents, is the spotlight on the 74-year-old  Gul. As I wrote in a previous piece, Warum Afghanistan? Teil VI:Washingtons Kriegsstrategie in Zentralasien, published this June on this website, Gul has been outspoken about the role of the US military in smuggling Afghan heroin out of the country via the top-security Manas Air Base in Kyrgyzstan.

As well, in a UPI interview on September 26, 2001, two weeks after the 9-11 attacks, Gul stated, in reply to the question who did Black Sept. 11?, “Mossad and its accomplices. The US spends $40 billion a year on its 11 intelligence agencies. That’s $400 billion in 10 years. Yet the Bush Administration says it was taken by surprise. I don’t believe it. Within 10 minutes of the second twin tower being hit in the World Trade Center CNN said Osama bin Laden had done it. That was a planned piece of disinformation by the real perpetrators…” [1] Gul is clearly not well liked in Washington. He claims his request for travel visas to the UK and to the USA have repeatedly been denied. Making Gul into the arch enemy would suit some in Washington nicely.

Who is Julian Assange?

Wikileaks founder and “Editor-in-chief”, Julian Assange, is a mysterious 29-year-old Australian about whom little is known. He has suddenly become a prominent public figure offering to mediate with the White House over the leaks. Following the latest leaks, Assange told Der Spiegel, one of three outlets with which he shared material from the most recent leak, that the documents he had unearthed would “change our perspective on not only the war in Afghanistan, but on all modern wars.” He stated in the same interview that ‘”I enjoy crushing bastards.” Wikileaks, founded in 2006 by Assange, has no fixed home and Assange claims he “lives in airports these days.”

Yet a closer examination of the public position of Assange on one of the most controversial issues of recent decades, the forces behind the September 11, 2001 attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center shows him to be curiously establishment. When the Belfast Telegraph interviewed him on July 19, he stated,

“Any time people with power plan in secret, they are conducting a conspiracy. So there are conspiracies everywhere. There are also crazed conspiracy theories. It’s important not to confuse these two….” What about 9/11?: “I’m constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud.” What about the Bilderberg Conference?: “That is vaguely conspiratorial, in a networking sense. We have published their meeting notes.” [2]

That statement from a person who has built a reputation of being anti-establishment is more than notable. First, as  thousands of physicists, engineers, military professionals and airline pilots have testified, the idea that 19 barely-trained Arabs armed with box-cutters could divert four US commercial jets and execute the near-impossible strikes on the Twin Towers and Pentagon over a time period of 93 minutes with not one Air Force NORAD military interception, is beyond belief. Precisely who executed the professional attack is a matter for genuine unbiased international inquiry.

Notable for Mr Assange’s blunt denial of any sinister 9/11 conspiracy is the statement in a BBC interview by former US Senator, Bob Graham, who chaired the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence when it performed its Joint Inquiry into 9/11. Graham told BBC, “I can just state that within 9/11 there are too many secrets, that is information that has not been made available to the public for which there are specific tangible credible answers and that that withholding of those secrets has eroded public confidence in their government as it relates to their own security.” BBC narrator: “Senator Graham found that the cover-up led to the heart of the administration.” Bob Graham: “I called the White House and talked with Ms. Rice and said, ‘Look, we’ve been told we’re gonna get cooperation in this inquiry, and she said she’d look into it, and nothing happened.’”

Of course, the Bush Administration was able to use the 9/11 attacks to launch its War on Terrorism in Afghanistan and then Iraq, a point Assange conveniently omits.

For his part, General Gul claims that US intelligence orchestrated the Wikileaks on Afghanistan to find a scapegoat, Gul, to blame. Conveniently, as if on cue, British Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron, on a state visit to India, lashed out at the alleged role of  Pakistan in supporting Taliban in Afghanistan, conveniently lending further credibility to the Wikileaks story. The real story of Wikileaks has clearly not yet been told.

Notes

[1] General Hamid Gul, Arnaud de Borchgrave 2001 Interview with Hamid Gul, Former ISI Chief, UPI, reprinted July 2010 on http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/07/28/arnaud-de-borchgrave-2001-interview-with-hamid-gul-former-isi-chief/

[2] Interview in BelfastTelegraph, July 19, 2010.

Wikileaks released material evidences US War Crimes

Yahoo News

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said Monday he believes there is evidence of war crimes in the thousands of pages of leaked U.S. military documents relating to the war in Afghanistan.

The remarks came after WikiLeaks, a whistle-blowing group, posted some 91,000 classified U.S. military records over the past six years about the war online, including unreported incidents of Afghan civilian killings and covert operations against Taliban figures.

The White House, Britain and Pakistan have all condemned the release of the documents, one of the largest unauthorized disclosures in military history.

Assange told reporters in London that “it is up to a court to decide really if something in the end is a crime. That said … there does appear to be evidence of war crimes in this material.”

Assange compared the impact of the released material to the opening of the East German secret police archives. “This is the equivalent of opening the Stasi archives,” he said.

The documents cover much of what the public already knows about the troubled nine-year conflict: U.S. special operations forces have targeted militants without trial, Afghans have been killed by accident, and U.S. officials have been infuriated by alleged Pakistani intelligence cooperation with the very insurgent groups bent on killing Americans.

WikiLeaks posted the documents Sunday. The New York Times, London’s Guardian newspaper and the German weekly Der Spiegel were given early access to the records.

White House national security adviser Gen. Jim Jones said the release “put the lives of Americans and our partners at risk.” In a statement, he then took pains to point out that the documents describe a period from January 2004 to December 2009, mostly during the administration of President George W. Bush. And, Jones added, before President Obama announced a new strategy.

Pakistan’s Ambassador Husain Haqqani agreed, saying the documents “do not reflect the current on-ground realities,” in which his country and Washington are “jointly endeavoring to defeat al-Qaida and its Taliban allies.”

The U.S. and Pakistan assigned teams of analysts to read the records online to assess whether sources or locations were at risk.

Pakistan’s powerful spy agency, Inter-Services Intelligence, said Monday that the accusations it had close connections to Taliban militants were malicious and unsubstantiated.

A senior ISI official said they were from unverified raw intelligence reports and were meant to impugn the reputation of the spy agency. He spoke on condition of anonymity in line with the agency’s policy.

Hamid Gul, a former head of the ISI who is mentioned many times in the documents, also denied allegations that he’d worked with the insurgents.

Assange said his group also had many more documents on other subjects, including files on countries from across the globe.

“We have built up an enormous backlog of whistleblower disclosures,” he said. “We have in this backlog … files that concern every country in the world with a population of over 1 million.”

He refused to go into detail, but said the information included “thousands of databases and files about all sorts of countries.”

Assange said that he believed more material would flood amid the blaze of publicity.

“It is our experience that courage is contagious,” he said. “Sources are encouraged by the opportunities that they see before them.”

* U.S. bombing of Children.  Read more details…

* War more out of hand than officials said.  Read more details…