Julian Assange: Free at last, but guilty of practicing journalism

 The United States Government (USG) - under the "rules-based international order" - has de facto ruled that Julian Assange is guilty of practicing journalism.

Edward Snowden had already noted that "when exposing a crime is treated as committing a crime, you are being ruled by criminals."

Criminals such as Mike "We Lie, We Cheat, We Steal" Pompeo, former Trump Secretary of State, who had planned to kidnap and kill Julian when he was head of the CIA.

The indomitable Jennifer Robinson and Julian's U.S. lawyer Barry Pollack sum it all up: the United States has "pursued journalism as a crime".

Julian was forced to suffer an unspeakably vicious Via Crucis because he dared to expose USG war crimes; the inner workings of the U.S. military in their rolling thunder War Of Terror (italics mine) in Afghanistan and Iraq; and - Holy of Holies - he dared to release emails showing the Democratic National Committee (DNC) colluded with the notorious warmongering Harpy Hillary Clinton.

Julian was subjected to relentless psychological torture, and nearly crucified for publishing facts that should always remain invisible to public opinion. That's what top-notch journalism is all about.

The whole drama teaches the whole planet everything one needs to know about the absolute control of the Hegemon over pathetic UK and EU.

And that bring us to the kabuki that may - and the operative word is "may" - be closing the case. Title of the twisted morality play: 'Plead Guilty or Die in Jail'.

The final twist in the plot line of the morality play runs like this: the combo behind the cadaver in the White House realized that torturing an Australian journalist and publisher in a maximum security U.S. prison in an electoral year was not exactly good for business.

At the same time the British establishment was begging to be excluded from the plot - as its "justice" system was forced by the Hegemon to keep an innocent man and family father hostage for 5 years, in abysmal conditions, in the name of protecting a basket of Anglo-American intel secrets.

In the end, the British establishment quietly applied all the pressure it could muster to run towards the exit - in full knowledge of what the Americans were planning for Julian....<<<Read More>>>...

Julian Assange is FREE! A Win For Humanity

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been released from a UK prison and is heading back to Australia following his decision to plead guilty to a single charge under the US espionage law.

Assange, 52, agreed to plead guilty to one count of conspiracy to obtain and disclose classified US national defense documents, as stated in a filing with the US District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands.

Assange was freed from Belmarsh's high-security prison on Monday June 24th, 2024. He was granted bail by the High Court in London and released at Stansted Airport in the afternoon. There, he left the UK.

Assange is set to appear in a court in Saipan, a US Pacific territory, at 9am on Wednesday (23:00 GMT on Tuesday).

He will be sentenced to 62 months, which he has already served....<<<Read More>>>...

The Most Important Press Freedom Case In The World Will Be Decided This Week

 This week, the UK High Court will decide on whether to extradite Julian Assange to the United States, the country that tried to assassinate him.

As many of you probably know, Assange is the founder of Wikileaks, an organization that leaked millions of classified documents which exposed extremely corrupt and egregious actions of various multinational corporations, organizations and governments. These actions include war crimes, the lies that have been used to justify war, environmental terrorism, political terrorism and more.

Many of the leaks from Wikileaks included details of US activities in Iraq and Afghanistan, including attacks on innocent civilians. They also revealed details of the US treatment of prisoners in Guantánamo Bay and links to clandestine activities in the Middle East, like goals to destabilize multiple governments. These destabilization efforts were carried out with little, if any, regard for their impact on civilians who are often caught in the crossfire. Oftentimes civilians were used to ramp up death counts.

“One of the hopeful things that I’ve discovered is that nearly every war that has started in the past 50 years has been a result of media lies. The media could have stopped it, if they had searched deep enough, if they hadn’t re-printed government propaganda they could have stopped it. But what does that mean? Well that means, basically, populations don’t like wars, and populations have to be fooled into wars, populations don’t willingly go to war. So if we have a good media environment, then we will also have a peaceful environment.” - Julian Assange...<<<Read More>>>...

Why Assange's Accuser, Anna Ardin, is Almost Certainly Lying

[S.O.T.T]: The mainstream media have ensured very few people know the detail of the "case" against Julian Assange in Sweden. The UN Working Group ruled that Assange ought never to have been arrested in the UK in the first place because there is no case, and no genuine investigation.

The other thing not widely understood is there is NO JURY in a rape trial in Sweden and it is a SECRET TRIAL. All of the evidence, all of the witnesses, are heard in secret. No public, no jury, no media. The only public part is the charging and the verdict. There is a judge and two advisers directly appointed by political parties. So you never would get to understand how plainly the case is a stitch-up.

There are so many inconsistencies in Anna Ardin's accusation of sexual assault against Julian Assange. But the key question which leaps out - and which strangely has not been asked anywhere else - is this:

Why did Anna Ardin not warn Sofia Wilen?

On 16 August, Julian Assange had sex with Sofia Wilen. Sofia had become known in the Swedish group around Assange for the shocking pink cashmere sweater she had worn in the front row of Assange's press conference. Anna Ardin knew Assange was planning to have sex with Sofia Wilen.

On 17 August, Ardin texted a friend who was looking for Assange: "He's not here. He's planned to have sex with the cashmere girl every evening, but not made it. Maybe he finally found time yesterday?"

Yet Ardin later testified that just three days earlier, on 13 August, she had been sexually assaulted by Assange; an assault so serious she was willing to try (with great success) to ruin Julian Assange's entire life. She was also to state that this assault involved enforced unprotected sex and she was concerned about HIV.

If Ardin really believed that on 13 August Assange had forced unprotected sex on her and this could have transmitted HIV, why did she make no attempt to warn Sofia Wilen that Wilen was in danger of her life? And why was Ardin discussing with Assange his desire for sex with Wilen, and texting about it to friends, with no evident disapproval or discouragement?

Ardin had Wilen's contact details and indeed had organised her registration for the press conference. She could have warned her. But she didn't.

For her story to be true involves acceptance of behaviour which is, in the literal sense, incredible.

Ardin's story is of course incredibly weak, but that does not matter. Firstly, you were never supposed to see all this detail. Rape trials in Sweden are held entirely in secret. There is no jury, and the government appointed judge is flanked by assessors appointed directly by political parties. If Assange goes to Sweden, he will disappear into jail, the trial will be secret, and the next thing you will hear is that he is guilty and a rapist.

Secondly, of course, it does not matter the evidence is so weak, as just to cry rape is to tarnish a man's reputation forever. Anna Ardin has already succeeded in ruining much of the work and life of Assange. The details of the story being pathetic is unimportant.

By crying rape, politically correct opinion falls in behind the line that it is wrong even to look at the evidence. If you are not allowed to know who the accuser is, how can you find out that she worked with CIA-funded anti-Castro groups in Havana and Miami?