updating Julian Assange news mainly by Wikileaks storify

I’d been checking into the related accounts, and given this most recent Tweet, I’d decided it was worth bringing more.

the Scribd 2018 transcript document  has an interesting ‘Uploaded by’, yes?  Please provide excerpts at will!  I’m strapped for time again, and had been working all morning on something wholly different in my (yes, longish) breaks from RL obligations.

It’s good to hear from Jen Robinson again:

I can’t even get into the Slimes via Private window, so I have no idea how it reads, but:

Whooosh-worthily helpful:

And speaking of “if he’s still there”, a fellow from class conscious had stopped by the Café and asked for my e-address, then had emailed me some links, and if I have it right, we’re able to click into this page: https://freepressday2019.wordpress.com/
to sign onto the letter of support to the MEAA, or sign up for may 3 actions in support of Assange and Manning; at the bottom it says:

Contact: worldpressfreedomday@protonmail.com to endorse either the letter or the call out for actions

and this weird news from Hanna Jonason on Wed. April 3: “(The meeting was supposed to take place today but Ecuador failed to authorise it).”

on afternoon edit:  i got curious, and plugged ‘Anonymous Cf4jDCM’ into a bing engine, and lo and behold got one hit: ‘EXCLUSIVE: Leaked Assange Court Transcript Sheds Light on US-Backed Ecuadorian Expulsion Plans’, thegatewaypundit.com, Cassandra Fairbanks,  April 6, 2019; some excerpts, then i’ll go look at the six pages for more:

“Journalists and media were banned from recording the proceedings, but a court record was later obtained through legal process and provided to The Gateway Pundit. It has never before been revealed.

“I have been in this embassy without sunlight for six years and essentially isolated from most people for seven months,” Assange told the court, “including electronic communication, the telephone etc, from my young children.”

“He went on to highlight the level of interference and security risks he faces at the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he has claimed asylum for the past seven years. Assange spoke of signal jammers placed in the embassy to prevent him making phone calls, as well as repeated attempts by unknown persons to break through his windows at night. He said that someone had even attempted to breach the window in the early hours before this very testimony.

“I am an assassination risk. It is not a joke. It is a serious business,” Assange said.

Assange went on to discuss how political changes in Ecuador had caused his asylum to come under threat.

“Due to various weaknesses in the Ecuadorian Government, namely the split – which I do not want to have any part of – within the Government’s Party, it has become weak and it has therefore started to lean on the United States and the UK for various kinds of support and this has caused an undue amount of influence by the United States,” said Assange.

This agitated the Attorney General of Ecuador, who was present at the hearing along with the presiding judge. “I have decided not to remain quiet, given the malicious and perverse insinuations about what Ecuador is doing, it has been influenced by foreign States,” he said. He added that “Ecuador is a sovereign country.”

Assange’s testimony continued, and he asserted that the Ecuadorian Government is “positioning itself in order to violate the asylum.” He accused them of “deliberately leaking out to the press selective scandalous material” and gagging him so he cannot rebut the allegations.

“It’s all about setting the ground in order to violate the asylum, to hand me over to the United States. It’s come off the back of our March 2017 publication, the largest-ever in the history of the CIA, that resulted in many threats against WikiLeaks and, as of June this year, my alleged source Joshua Schulte, a CIA intelligence officer, was seized, put into prison, and they are trying to sentence him to 135 years,” Assange told the court.”

“We know that Senators have written to [US Vice President] Mike Pence, telling him to tell President Moreno to hand me over.”

I agree with Julian that his largest transgression was publishing the CIA vaults 7 and 8, and may have even been when the hits on him by the ‘fearless journlists’ at the Intercept began in earnest, but then…i live in a time-warp.

(cross-posted at caucus99percent.com)

29 responses to “updating Julian Assange news mainly by Wikileaks storify

  1. Going back to the CIA’s founding days, psychology and psychological operations appear to have been woven into the DNA of US intelligence. As long ago as 1954, when the CIA was just seven-years-old, President Eisenhower commissioned a review, called the Doolittle Report, to assess the state of the agency and offer guidance going forward. The report concluded that the CIA must become “an aggressive covert psychological, political and paramilitary organization… more ruthless than that employed by the enemy”.

    An aggressive covert psychological, political and paramilitary organisation. In that order.

    By the 1980’s psychological operations were well established for use against foreign populations during wartime. Under Ronald Regan, however, their use was bureaucratised and expanded to target domestic populations also, in times of both war and peace. To facilitate this, Regan’s administration established an inter-agency Psychological Operations Committee (POC), whose aim was to create a “coherent, worldwide psychological operations strategy”, using psyops as a “weapons system” both at home and abroad, in peacetime and in war.

    By 1996, according to a thesis submitted to the Naval War College under the direction of the Chairman of Joint Military Operations, the US Army alone boasted 24 psyops teams, some of which went on to develop units called “Media Dissemination Battalions”. The 1996 thesis argued, among other things, for an increased use of psyops in ‘Military Operations Other than War’ (MOOTW), including a greater role as a “political and domestic tool”.

    Seven years later, in 2003, the JCOS wrote that psychological operations were by then “a vital part of the broad range of US diplomatic, informational, military and economic activities”.

    Little wonder, then, that by 2017 a Sonoma State University paper reported that upwards of 80 percent of mainstream media content emanates from Propaganda and Public Relations firms, among whose major clients are the Pentagon and the US military. This has spawned what the authors term a ‘military-industrial-media complex’.

    In a 2018 book chapter, Piers Robinson, Chair in Politics, Society and Political Journalism at The University of Sheffield added that “the production of propaganda involves more than government and corporation ‘spin doctors’ and ‘PR’ agents, it also involves a variety of entities, including think tanks, NGOs, and even academia. It also involves actors from within the so-called ‘deep state’ including the intelligence services”.

    True to the modus operandi of counterintelligence, which, according to the CIA website, seeks to “leverage insights” into adversary “vulnerabilities”, every major vulnerability in the human reality-processing system has been leveraged and exploited in order to smear Julian Assange and Wikileaks since the DoD launched its war on the publisher, and on the principle of freedom of speech, in 2008.

    In this case, the adversary in the US crosshairs has been not only Julian Assange and Wikileaks, but the global populations that Wikileaks seeks to inform. It is our own vulnerabilities – the vulnerabilities in the information processing systems of all human beings – that have been leveraged and exploited in order to undermine and discredit Wikileaks.

    And while we will likely never know whether the war on Wikileaks had its own ‘Mitchell and Jessen’ behind the scenes, the field of psychology certainly holds a great deal to offer a smear campaign such as that waged against Julian Assange in 2008. In fact, the Cyber Counterintelligence branch would have needed all the psychological help it could get back then.

    It is a tall order, psychologically, to turn the tide of world opinion against an organisation that boasts “trust” as its “centre of gravity”. The task becomes even trickier when that organisation is known for its scrupulous honesty, having only ever published the truth. Truth, moreover, that has exposed the lethal criminality, lies and corruption of the very people and institutions seeking to promote the smears.

    What is needed in such a situation is to turn reality on its head. The fundamental psychological task is to render truth suspicious and deceit reassuring, war criminals virtuous and their critics corrupt, pacifism threatening and violence comforting, abuse of power righteous and resistance reprobate, torture forgivable and whistleblowing a crime, censorship a bastion of democracy and free speech a menace to be overcome. Much as George Orwell foresaw.

    Protecting falsehoods in this way, as any student of political theory will know, is a cornerstone of democracy. Democracy is all about suppressing information. Keeping populations in the dark. Concealing the truth. […] Throwing influential publishers under the bus for exposing the truth about such things, and silencing the whistleblowers behind them, is the only way to keep the whole ‘democracy’ show on the road.

  2. Ah. The failure of Russiagate not only aids Drumpf’s reelection,it provokes Hillarybot scapegoating of Assange and alternative media.

    • a response to that calculation might need to in ten parts, with all the various combinations of considerations afoot. i’m still stuck on this ‘news’ from the slimes in 2018 about manafort allegedly willing to trade assange for debt relief to moreno’s ecuador. kinda based on anonymous sources, yada, yada, w/ srsly, and internal link the guardian by juke harding and homies about manafort meeting w/ assange to offer him a diplomatic post in…russia.

      ““In at least two meetings with Mr. Manafort, Mr. Moreno and his aides discussed their desire to rid themselves of Mr. Assange, who has been holed up in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London since 2012, in exchange for concessions like debt relief from the United States, according to three people familiar with the talks, the details of which have not been previously reported.

      There is no evidence that Mr. Manafort was working with — or even briefing — President Trump or other administration officials on his discussions with the Ecuadoreans about Mr. Assange. Nor is there any evidence that his brief involvement in the talks was motivated by concerns about the role that Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks played in facilitating the Russian effort to help Mr. Trump in the 2016 presidential election, or the investigation into possible coordination between Mr. Assange and Mr. Trump’s associates, which has become a focus for Mr. Mueller.
      Mr. Manafort and WikiLeaks have both denied a recent report in The Guardian that Mr. Manafort visited Mr. Assange at the Ecuadorean Embassy in London in 2013, 2015 and 2016.

      In the months after Mr. Moreno took office, the Ecuadorean government granted citizenship to Mr. Assange and secretly pursued a plan to provide him a diplomatic post in Russia as a way to free him from confinement in the embassy in London. (That plan was ultimately dropped in the face of opposition from British authorities, who have said they will arrest Mr. Assange if he leaves the embassy.)”

      • FIDEL NARVAEZ: This story about Manafort meeting with Lenin Moreno is true. It is not a secret. It was reported normally and immediately. Mr. Moreno met with many people before he took presidency. When they met, Moreno was not president yet; he was president-elect, apparently. And this is true, and the sources that the Guardian is using for the fabrications immediately starting [inaudible]brating connections between Manafort and WikiLeaks or Assange on nonsenses. The reports that we have is that it was Moreno who put Assange on the table in that meeting with Manafort. According to the reports that we have, Manafort just basically listened. Moreno doesn’t want to have Assange at the embassy. He never wanted. Not even when he was vice president of Correa.

        So why the change on his policies? Because he has basically betrayed the movement, and the people who elected him, and the concrete political project. And he’s implemented the project of the opposition. And the project of the opposition is a very pro-U.S. project. Moreno has, in fact, re-opened the doors for the U.S. in Ecuador. Now we have U.S. military planes operating again in Ecuador. That is against our constitution, for example. And the asylum to Julian Assange was granted by President Correa, who is right now the main political enemy of Moreno. So they will want to finish with Assange, and they are doing everything possible to do that.

        Comprador Moreno’s selling Assange – Manafort/Trump did not bite. Why does Moreno again threaten Assange’s turnover coincidentally with Mueller failure? Because it’s another distracting psyop and gamble for the security state.

        • okay, maybe so, and yes, i did dig it up at the real news again and forgotten i’d read the transcript back in the day. i’m agnostic that it’s product of the mueller failure, esp. in that ecuador has signed a memo pf military agreement (including bases) and same for colombia, although nato had earlier announced that colombia IS now a partner of nato) with the trump administration, all the better to help launch a ‘low-intensity’ invasion of bolivarian venezuela.

          • ? Agnostic because Ecuador’s alliance with US military opposes his cooperation with US security state? If he already wanted Assange out, expelling Assange’s not much of an additional gift to US.

            Of course this is speculation, comrade. They don’t usually put commies on the inside.

            • i may not be reading your question correctly, but agnostic that the mueller investigation (failures to find trump collusion w/ russia?) was moreno’s incentive to expel assange from the embassy; i see this narrative at play:

              moreno (correa’s former VP) has hastened to undo rafael correa’s bolivarian policies and has declared the nation ‘open for bidness to amerika’ (MAGA), and boss Tweet and his troika of tyrrany have crowned cia-trained guaido king of VZ, another alliance against leftists in the global south, hence the cia (usaid ‘humanitarian’ caravans) with of course brazil’s thug bolsonarao in the mix. so you can’t have a journalist like assange mooking up the works, can you? well, i may not have made my case, but once i get this green party diary posted i’ll try to think a bit more and read some more of your comments.

        • “While President Trump may ‘love Wikileaks’ for flooding the airwaves with information stolen by the Russian government, Mr. Assange is in fact a tool of Vladimir Putin and the Russian intelligence service.” Read more of Chairman @RepEliotEngel statement

    • i scanned it all, no new info save for a few of the ‘leftist’ gods mentions. yes, it’s an information war psyop, but my favorite meme of the past two years is that Dems love the cia, as it serves their purposes to believe even ‘anonymous intelligence officials’. but i still say that the worst offense assange/wikileaks did (as does assange) was to publish the cia vaults 7 and 8, esp. 7, as iirc, it demonstrates that it was child’s play to make communications look as though they came from russians or whomever else was the flavor of the day. luke harding-ville.

      now one commenter over yonder remind me/us of mark warer issuing a stand-down order over negotiations with assange not to publish those cia exploits. lemme see if i can find it…then i’ll bring if i can.

      • it’s a little different than the video she’d brought, but here it is: ‘Did James Comey and Senator Mark Warner ‘Collude’ on #Russiagate “; The U.S. was in talks for a deal with Julian Assange but then FBI Director James Comey ordered an end to negotiations after Assange offered to prove Russia was not involved in the DNC leak, as Ray McGovern explains.’, by Ray McGovern, mint press news

        but then solomon at the hill quoted ‘multiple sources’, and i can’t see the scribd document.


        • Yeah. Couldn’t get bull-head Assange to throw Russia under bus. O mio my, whatcha gonna do wid dat guy?

  3. Alongside system justification, a psychological vulnerability underpinning smear campaigns is what psychologists call derogation of moral advocates. According to psychological research, those who draw attention to their society’s failings tend to be viewed negatively by the very groups they seek to enlighten and assist.

    Fortunately for smear artists, this process packs a double punch. It applies not only to publishers of systemic critique such as Julian Assange and Wikileaks, but anyone who sticks their head above the parapet to defend Wikileaks and Julian Assange.

    In a PhD thesis on the topic, Nadia Bashir from the University of Toronto writes, “Individuals generally agree that questionable, harmful, and illegal behaviours are wrong and unethical. Thus, it may seem counterintuitive that individuals often vilify those who aim to expose and therefore eliminate these behaviours. A growing body of research demonstrates, however, that individuals who take a stand against immoral behaviours (i.e., moral advocates) can elicit scorn rather than admiration.”

    “O, you, you’re not just a critic, you’re an enemy.” Do warmongers unite or divide a people, comrade?

  4. Bashir found that those who demonise moral advocates do so because they value social image over moral considerations. What bothers detractors of moral advocates, she says, is “how the advocates have made their group look in the eyes of others.” To restore the group’s tarnished social image, “group members seem to adopt a ‘shoot the messenger’ approach.”

    Crapitalism amplifies the inclination towards this fraudulent collective welfare. Would NewsGuard be able to suppress rather than amplify this fraud, comrade? Ooo my goodness; NewsGuard amplifies fraud?

    Danger danger, Will Robinson! Subject is radioactive. Must expel!

  5. in a smear offensive such as that against Julian Assange, it is critical to foster the perception that the majority of desirable others hold derogatory views, while suppressing coverage of favourable attitudes and support. Suppressing coverage of rallies to free Assange, with international support from respected figures, is a case in point.

    As is failing to mention polling data indicating popular support for Wikileaks and Juilan Assange. Even among viewers of mainstream media, where Assange is routinely derided, over 80 per cent of participants in a recent 60-Minutes Australia poll, involving 10,000 respondents, voted for the Australian Prime Minister to bring Julian Assange safely home to Australia.

    Preventing such realities from being shared is pivotal to smear campaigns, lest reality be tuned in unofficial directions, and populations determine reality amongst themselves. Instead, dissenters from official narratives must be made to feel isolated, and alone.

  6. who is most vulnerable to sharing reality with elites, and therefore most likely to buy into the smear campaign?

    Given the drive to tune reality-perception in desired directions, it is those who crave elite belonging and acceptance. Harbouring aspirations to elitist circles, such as elitist media, political or academic circles, could be expected to foster reality-sharing with elites, by virtue of elitist aspirations.

    Importantly, this vulnerability goes beyond mere conscious conformity. It involves a subconscious process by which officially anointed narratives and smears, such as those on Russiagate, Wikileaks and Assange, feel subjectively more real and true to the brain.

    And they would be inclined to repress the gruesomeness of their security thugs and feign Pangloss … while their puppeteer dances them around the stage.

    So much for exceptionalism, comrade.

  7. Since the 2016 US election, anyone who is remotely left, centre left, pseudo-left, latte-left, corporate left, or #Resistance™ liberal has been incited, vigorously, to view Julian Assange as being on the right. The alt-right. The Putin-right. The Trumpen-right. The misogynist right. Or the anarchist-right. [Hmmm … got me a little there … especially with Eddy tagging along …]

    Fortunately for propagandists, the antipathy towards outgroup members can skyrocket from disdain to murderous rage under conditions of fear and threat. The immense fear and threat experienced by many after Donald Trump’s election is a case in point. The impulse towards the ‘other’ in such conditions can be a fight to the death.

    Shite! Weaponized identity politics – is this the “double movement” by murderers, comrade?

  8. RT had announced this earlier, and wikileaks had the one-hour press conference video with Fidel Narváez, Kristinn Hrafnsson and Jennifer Robinson, but joe lauria has essentially provided a transcript. it’s an ugly extortion story resulting from the long-time spying and snooping on assange, his attorneys, the doctor who’d examined him, and his defense strategy documents.

    hrafnsson even went to spain to meet with the extortionists and filmed them, then went to the po-po.

care to comment? (no registration required)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s