Melbourne for Wikileaks (@melbourne4wiki) holds vigils for Julian Assange, every Friday, from 6:30pm until 8:30pm, under the clocks at Melbourne's iconic Flinders Street Station. Yesterday, Friday 19 February, I unfurled a canvas banner, 5 meters wide and 1.7 meters deep, with a big picture of Assange on it. No sooner had we raised this banner than we heard loud cries of support for Julian Assange. Support also came from cars, whose drivers tooted their horns, as they drove past the station. (See video below.)

After some time, in which members of the group handed out leaflets and and spoke to passers-by, a succession of people spoke through a megaphone. I was the third speaker. The video of that 7 minute speech was filmed and uploaded to YouTube and is embedded below. Unfortunately the recordings of two other speeches were lost and can't be included here. (I will transcribe my speech soon and include it in this article. Note that in the part where I argue that Julian Assange could not get a fair trial in East Virginia, I said this would be because the "jury was likely to be made up of employees of US intelligence services and their siblings." I meant to say, of course, "employees of US intelligence services and their relatives.")

James Sinnamon speaks at Vigil for Julian Assange

Thanks to everyone who told me my hat looked terrible. I promise never to wear it again.

Appendix: Transcript of James Sinnamon's speech

I'm here today to show my outrage at the fact that the Australian government has done nothing, while this heroic, courageous and visionary journalist, Julian Assange has been illegally held in prison, illegally psychologically tortured and now, illegally physically tortured because no reason other than the fact that through Wikileaks, he was able to tell the world what the United States didn't want us to know about what they were doing in their own grubby political world and other countries like Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya.

We now know, because of Julian Assange and other whistleblowers [2] before him, that the American case for their wars against Iraq and Libya and Afghanistan was a pack of lies. We know that because of Julian Assange and courageous whistleblowers from within the ranks of the United States military and within the United States government who know that what the United States has been telling the world is a lie and they've proven this to us. They've given us the information to show us that they've been lying to us. [3]

Now, because the world knows so much more about what the United States has been doing, it means that they are not able, so easily, to make up a pretext towards another war against another country.

Obviously, two countries that are in America's cross-hairs is Venezuela in South America - they want to take over Venezuela and steal all their petroleum - and they want to take over Iran for daring to be a sovereign independent sovereign country not under the control of the United States.

Now, Julian Assange is an Australian citizen. To report the crimes of the Americans and their allies is not a crime. It's journalism.

To speak the truth is not a crime. It's journalism.

But, in the eyes of the crooked, vile people, that are running the United States, and their allies, it is a crime for people to speak the truth about their crimes, and that is why they have been trying, since 2010, to get their grubby little hands on Julian Assange and they have done that through subterfuge with the help of the crooked Swedish government and the London government, they've fabricated a charge that Julian Assange had sexually assaulted these two women in Sweden.

Julian was quite prepared to go Sweden to answer those charges, but the Swedish government would not agree to prevent him from being extradited to the United States. So, he knew that the Swedish government, in collusion with the United States, had attempted to get him on to Swedish soil only so that they could send him off to the United States.

In the United States there plan was to try him in secret before a jury made up exclusively of people from East Virginia, who are mostly working for intelligence agencies or their siblings. [4] So it is unlikely that this so-called jury would have [inaudible ] paid any attention to the argument of Julian Assange's defence team. They would have taken about 30 seconds to pronounce him guilty and once Julian Assange had been found to be guilty, their plan was to lock him in jail for 175 years and in his prison term he would be confined to a single cell for 23 hours a day and allowed outside for only one hour a day. [5]

He would be denied any books, any Internet, anything. His life would be an absolute misery. The people he would be in jail with would be convicted terrorists and other murderers.

The prospect of this was so terrible for Julian Assange that he was clearly thinking of committing suicide rather than allow himself to be locked in jail for 175 years.

Now, all this time, for the last 10 years, the Australian government has said almost nothing. It's been ages - weeks since the Australian Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, has said a word about Julian Assange. All he has said is, "Oh, it's going on in England and it's not really our business to interfere with what the British courts are saying."

Not a word about the complete travesty of justice that Julian Assange is facing with the fact that every day he is brought to court - every day he was tried - he was brought to court inside a cage. He couldn't speak to his lawyers. He couldn't pass notes to his lawyers. He was stripped several times and searched each day before he went into court.

How is that 'due process' according to Foreign Minister Maurice Payne? She calls that 'due process'?

Clearly, this Australian government, that's supposed to have a duty of care towards Australian citizens, doesn't want to know.

They're turning their backs on Julian Assange and doing nothing.

Any government that allows another government - the British government, the American government - to treat any of its citizens, that have committed no crime, in this way, doesn't deserve to be in power.

And what we have to do is, when every member of Parliament asks for your vote at the next election, ask that member of Parliament: What have they done for Julian Assange for the last 10 years whilst an innocent Australian citizen, who has committed no crime, has been tortured physically, [6] confined illegally and psychologically tortured? Where have they lifted a finger for Julian Assange? Ask them that question and it will be amazed if any one of them can talk to you with a straight face.

What you have to do is you have to find some candidates who do have a backbone and do have principles who are prepared to stand up for Julian Assange. Find those candidates, vote for them.

So what we are going to do is to continue to hold these vigils every Friday night. We're going to try to reach a larger and larger audience, get more and more people to these vigils and these protests and make our voices so loud that it will be impossible for the Australian government to ignore and continue to do nothing for Julian Assange.

It's about time the Australian government acted. If they had a backbone. If they had any decency in them, here's what they would do:

Tomorrow they would send out an contingent of Federal Police. [7] They would go right to Belmarsh Prison. They would tell the Belmarsh Prison authorities that Julian Assange, an Australian citizen, is being held there illegally by the British government. They would demand that the British government immediately release Julian Assange to come back to Australia. That's what a government with a backbone and decency would do.

Now the Australian government has done nothing. They've barely said a word about Julian Assange these last ten years. Any word they say is to cast aspersions on Julian Assange.

None of these people deserve your vote. None of them deserve to hold office. Make sure you act on that at the next federal election. Thank you.

Footnote[s]

[1] On the previous Friday 12 February, I had not gone to the vigil due to the sudden and unexpected, if short-lived, outbreak in Coronavirus infections on that day. On the Friday prior to that, Friday 5 February, the banner had been made with only one tubular canvas slot at each end into which the supporting dowel poles with which it could be held up for display could be inserted. Unfortunately, because of the banner's great size - 5 meters x 1.7 meters - one pole at each end was not sufficient to support the banner. A third tubular canvas slot was needed in the middle. As a workaround, I stood behind the banner (as pictured right) and held it up with my raised arms hands in the middle. After some time this fatigued me and we chose to place it flat on the ground facing upwards. (The image is linked to a short @melbourne4wiki tweet which contains a short video from which that image was copied. That tweet was re-tweeted by "Denver Free Assange" (@DNVfreeJA) The following Friday wooden poles to support the banner were inserted into its three long narrow vertical pockets, as you can see in the video.

[2] Correction: Julian Assange is, himself, a journalist and not a whistleblower.

[3] Corrrection: In fact the WMD fabrication that was used to start the war against Iraq in 2003 was not exposed by any whistleblower or Wikileaks. United Nations weapons inspector Scott Ritter. Scott Ritter, who had previously uncovered Iraqi chemical weapons, argued in 2003, that chemical weapons in Iraq didn't exist in quantities substantial enough to pose a threat. He consequently opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq but, for most people, that news was overwhelmed by the vast amount of corporate newsmedia reporting in favour of the invasion of Iraq.

[4] Two corrections: I should have said that the "jury ... are all working for intelligence agencies or their family" and not the "jury ... are mostly working for intelligence agencies or their siblings."

[5] Julian Assange would be allowed out for only one hour every day into another adjacent cell as small as his main cell for exercise.

[6] Correction: During his illegal detention inside the Ecuadorian embassy, which lasted 6 years and 10 months (19/6/12 - 11/4/19) Julian was psychologically tortured, but not physically tortured. This changed after Julian Assange was dragged out of the embassy on 11 April 2019 and imprisoned at Belmarsh. There Julian Assange was subject to both psychological and physical torture.

[7] Monday 22 Feb 2021, 7:47AM +11 : Upon further reflection, whilst the British government's imprisonment and torture of Julian Assange is clearly illegal, Julian Assange's release is unlikely to occur simply as a consequence of a contingent of Australian Federal police officers attempting to enforce Australian law and international law on British soil.

However, were Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison to speak to British Prime Minster Boris Johnson to demand Julian Assange's release, I think it highly unlikely that the British PM would not accede.

If Boris Johnson did not agree to release Julian Assange, Scott Morrison would have this recourse: He could threaten to take the case to to the International Criminal Court (ICC) or to the United Nations. The ICC would almost certainly find the United Kingdom's treatment of Julian Assange illegal, if not criminal.

If Julian Assange's case were ever brought to the United Nations, the United Kingdom's odious complicity with the US government would be clearly shown before the whole world.

In the high likelihood that Boris Johnson would then agree to release Julian Assange, Scott Morrison should then send a contingent of Australian Federal Police to escort Julian Assange from Belmarsh Prison back to Melbourne in order to safeguard him from any further malign behaviour by any agent of the United States government.

This is how a decent and humane national leader would behave.

Federal Labour Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese ('Albo' - pictured right), on Australia Day, tweeted in praise of local Australian heroes, with the glaring exception of Julian Assange, the most widely-recognised Australian anywhere, whose suffering is unfathomable, and whose services to the anti-war movement are immeasurable. Why wasn't Julian Assange included and why does the Australian Government allow the UK and the US to continue their illegal persecution, imprisonment, and torture, of this Australian citizen?

 

Anthony Albanese's Australia Day tweet about Australian local heroes fails to mention another Australian who is at least as heroic of any one of the four people featured in that image, and far more famous: Julian Assange

In response to the following Tweet Anthony Albanese (@AlboMP) the Leader of the Labor Party Opposition in the Australian Federal Parliament:

"These are the true heroes of Australia. They put themselves on the line every day of this pandemic – to keep us safe, to keep us healthy, and to keep Australia moving forward. On this Australia Day, on behalf of the nation, we say thank you."

… I posted:

"Thanks to @julianAssange_">@julianAssange_ https://wikileaks.org and @SaveManning">@SaveManning we now know the truth about Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay, US Political corruption, … Surely, Julian Assange is no less an Australian hero? Why won't our Parliament demand Julian's freedom?"

Julian Assange is an Australian citizen who has committed no crime. Julian's only 'crime' is to set up the Wikleaks news service from which we have learned a great deal about the United States' wars, proxy wars, and economic sanctions, impacting extensively on humankind through recent decades. These malign actions by the U.S. government have cost the lives of many hundreds of thousands in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Lebanon, Palestine, Ukraine, Russia, Bolivia, Haiti, Venezuela, and elsewhere, as well as causing economic devastation. Were it not for Wikileaks revealing to us much of what the U.S. government would prefer to have kept hidden from us, we can only guess what further amount of carnage and devastation would have ensued.

As has been found by Nils Melzer, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture [1], Julian Assange has been effectively imprisoned and tortured for 9 years now. Following the initial 8 years Julian spent confined to the Ecuadorian Embassy, in order to avoid being extradited to the U.S., he was outrageously locked up for an additional 50 weeks in a maximum security prison, mostly in solitary confinement, by the disgraceful London magistrate Vanessa Barraitser, for skipping bail in 2012. He had skipped bail only in order to legitimately seek asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy. Fifty weeks is the absolute maximum that anyone can be sentenced to for skipping bail, and the length of Assange's sentence was unheard of. When this outrageous sentence expired, Barraitser further extended it, giving the U.S. government lawyers' more time to prepare their 'case' for Julian's extradition.

Should the United States government succeed in having Julian Assange extradited, he stands to be tried in secret [2] before a jury selected from the Eastern District of Virginia, a community which consists almost entirely of U.S. spy agency employees and their spouses. It is highly unlikely that any one of these jurors would pay the least regard to any evidence put forward in Julian Assange's defence. Almost certainly, he stands certain to be found guilty and thence to be sentenced to 175 years in solitary confinement. Once Julian Assange's sentence commences, he would only be allowed to leave his cell for 1 hour each day for exercise - this is effectively a death sentence, if not worse,

Even the extradition hearings have been a cruel medieval travesty of justice. Julian was deprived of sufficient preparation for his defense. He was subsequently brought into the courtroom in handcuffs, held inside a glass cage from which he could not hear clearly, and denied the right to speak in private to his lawyers. Public seating at the court was severely limited, so coverage of the event was grossly inadequate. The mainstream press avoided covering this crucial international matter and, when it did, it tended simply to publish press releases from the US legal team, ignoring Julian's defense. The trial was not publicly filmed and the alternative press had virtually no access to what was going on. Although disallowing Julian's extradition on medical grounds, the judge threw out matters relating to the political nature of the United State's pursuit of Julian because he had exposed its war-crimes and corruption, with US officials urging his assassination, and the public right to know about these crimes and anything else that governments do. Two Australian parliamentarians have visited Julian and have tried to stick up for him, but the Australian Government ignored their reports. Unfortunately the United States has been allowed to appeal even the judge's denial of extradition on medical grounds, and Julian continues to be held in prison whilst his massive team of persecutors prepare more ersatz legal arguments whereby they claim the right to cover up their own grotesque crimes.

Surely the Australian government has a duty of care to any Australian citizen, but particularly to a citizen who has contributed so much to humanity and who has committed no crime. Even skipping bail was deemed justified by the United Nations, which has tried to intervene on Julian's behalf, but which the UK government has persistently and shamelessly ignored.

It is long past the time in which the Australian government should have intervened against the U.S. government's efforts to kidnap Julian Assange from London. The Australian government should act now to demand that the U.K. immediately free Julian Assange from his illegal detention and send him on a flight back home to Australia, with a guarantee of immunity from United States pursuit when he gets here. Were the Australian government not to do this, the matter certainly should be raised on the floor of Parliament by Anthony Albanese and debated. But Albanese is missing in action so far.

Footnote[s]

[1] Nils Melzer's full title is "United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment"

[2] Were Julian Assange to be tried in public, the United States 'case' against him would fall in a heap. The whole world would see the real United States' government for the outlaw rogue regime that it really is. Although I have, so far, not viewed the documentary evidence for this, I think it is safe for me to assume that the United States' government intends to conduct its 'trial' of Julian Assange in secret, hidden away from public view. In retrospect, I don't know if this was ever raised by Julian's defence team, but had the U.S. prosecution refused to give an undertaking to try Julian public, it's 'case' would have been shown to be even more of a joke than it already was.

Republished, with embedded 25 minute Video, from Assange extradition court ruling (11/1/21) |PressTV. This is the most recent edition of Richard Medhurst's (pictured) weekly Communiqué broadcast.

See also: Melbourne Vigil to Free Julian Assange at Flinders Street Station this Friday at 7:30pm (10/1.21).
The 210K PDF file, from which the double-sided A5 flyer "Uphold the Rule of Law", about Julian Assange can be printed, can be downloaded from below.

A British Judge has ruled on whether Australian journalist Julian Assange will be extradited to the United States. The WikiLeaks founder is wanted on espionage and computer hacking charges and faces up to 175 years in prison.

As Richard Medhurst, who attended the extradition hearing, explains, the judge's decision to block extradition solely on health grounds still leaves press freedoms at risk and validates the politically charged indictment by the US.

Conceivably, were the prosecution, at a subsequent hearing, to assure Judge Vanessa Barraitser that they would take tender-loving care of Julian Assange during his solitary confinement and 'trial' before a jury packed with U.S. secret service operatives, she could then rule that the health grounds objection to the U.S. plans to extradite Julian Assange no longer holds whilst again disregarding the clear politcal motivation behind the U.S. extradition request.

Daily, lively and dedicated coverage at https://defend.wikileaks.org/liveblog/ from what is closest to the horse's mouth, from https://defend.wikileaks.org/. There is plenty to read about, including a defense whereby Julian Assange is located on the autism spectrum and strong precedents where England refused US request for extradition in very similar cases, which took into consideration the harshness of US prison conditions and the likelihood of suicide.

In the cases of Lauri Love and Gary McKinnon, the U.S. government was blocked from extraditing them because the United Kingdom High Court of Justice (Love) and the British Home Secretary (McKinnon) recognized their Asperger’s syndrome would result in degrading or inhuman treatment that violated human rights. Source: https://shadowproof.com/2020/09/23/doctor-assange-aspergers-prison-extradition-trial/.

The video below is of an international peoples' forum on Assange's predicament, dated 21 September 2020.

Title was: "Australian action to help Assange as extradition hearing approaches". Donations can be made to: gofundme.com/f/melbourne4wikileaks-bringassangehome.

Julian Assange’s extradition hearing starts on Monday 24th of this month. To mark the occasion and to help increase awareness in his hometown of Melbourne, Melbourne4WikiLeaks is holding a rally at the State Library of Victoria at 6:30pm on the evening of Friday 21st February.

We feel that it is important to keep pressure on the Australian Government to intervene with both the UK and US in order to stop the extradition and bring Julian home.

Additionally, we are aware from his legal team and his father’s visits that events supporting him in his hometown greatly lift his spirits.

Time is running out for Julian and it is vitally important at this time to step up the campaign.

You can help in a number of ways:

Firstly, you can come to the Rally where we will be joined by speakers including Caitlin Johnstone, Julian Hill and others as well as a live video cross to Julian’s father, John Shipton in London. There will also be music and a special video presentation.

You can find details of the No Extradition Rally at https://www.facebook.com/events/178087276737493/?active_tab=about

Please invite friends and share widely.

Secondly, you should write to your local Federal member and/or Senator. The best way to find who your local Member is via https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Parliamentarian_Search_Results?q=&mem=1&par=-1&gen=0&ps=0

Which also provides links to phone numbers, email and postal addresses.

Finally, but importantly, you can help us to cover costs of the rally by donating to our GoFundMe fundraiser at
https://www.gofundme.com/f/melbourne4wikileaks-bringassangehome?sharetype=teams&member=2467358&utm_medium=copy_link&utm_source=customer&utm_campaign=p_na+share-sheet&pc_code=ot_co_dashboard_a&rcid=62fb09c32cf94166afdd90b50d09580a

We look forward to seeing you there.

Jacob & Simon

Melbourne4WikiLeaks

Melbourne4WikiLeaks on all social media platforms…. [email protected].

The article below has been adapted from a leaflet I printed and handed out to many of those who attended the meeting last night at the State Library in support of Julian Assange. Whilst speakers at that meeting showed that the outlook for a broader and more effective for Julian Assange now seems better than what my leaflet below indicates, the fact remains that because of errors of judgement in many cases, time has been lost, and Julian Assange's very life may well be at stake now. Those who want to participate in the Melbourne campaign to free Julian Assange could visit https://twitter.com/Melbourne4Wiki, https://www.facebook.com/Melbourne-4-WikiLeaks-2301719993184488/ or e-mail [email protected].

Wikileaks statement: Wikileaks has grave concerns about the state of health of our publisher, Julian Assange, who has been moved to the health ward of Belmarsh prison. Mr Assange's health had already significantly deteriorated after seven years inside the Ecuadorian embassy, under conditions that were incompatible with basic human rights. The United Nations twice found him to have been arbitrarily detained and called on the United Kingdom to honor its committments under international law and free him. The UK's refusal to abide by UN rulings, and its subsequent treatment of Mr. Assange since his arrest, presents serious questions about the UK's standing as a human rights-abiding nation.

In his last year in the embassy, as the US finalized its extraditions plans, Julian Assange was, at the bequest of US authorities, totally isolated and gagged - a situation designed to make his life as hard as possible.

During the seven weeks in Belmarsh his health has continued to deteriorate and he has dramatically lost weight. The decision of prison authorities to move him to the health ward speaks for itself.

We strongly condemn the refusal by the Swedish court to postpone a hearing on 3rd June on the basis of Mr Assange's health condition. Defense lawyer for Assange, Per Samuelson said that Julian Assange's health state last Friday was such "that it was not possible to conduct a normal conversation with him."

Tomorrow, May 30, there is a formal hearing in Westminster Court on the Extradition request by the Trump administration. The initial U.S. warrant has been expanded to include a life sentence or potential death penalty under the Espionage Act, announced las week in the superceding indictment which disclosed 17 additional charges, bringing the potential sentence to 175 years in prison. The indictments have beenwidely condemned by free press organizations as the most serious attack against publishing activities in modern times - the Trump administration in essence criminalizes the very act of journalism. The indictment utilises the archaic Espionage Act of 1917 to indict a publisher for the first time in history - in an unprecedented escalation of the Trump administration's war on the free press.

Kristinn Hrafnsson, WikiLeaks editor-in-chief:

"Julian's case is of major historic significance. It will be remembered as the worst attack on press freedom in our lifetime. The People need to voice their condemnation; it is their politicians, their courts, their police and their prisons that are being abused in order to leave this black stain on history. Please act now to avert this shame."

Source of this press release from WikiLeaks is https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1133847992656715776

The following letter is to be sent to every independent candidate standing in the Federal Parliamentary election. A similar letter is to be sent to the candidates standing for the smaller parties. It is my hope that raising the profile of Julian Assange now may result in the election, on 18 May, of a Federal Parliament with at least a few members who are prepared to act to try to protect Julian Assange from those in the United States whose criminal conduct he helped expose to the world.

Dear Sir/Madam,

Firstly, thank you for standing as a candidate in the forthcoming election of 18 May.

Still from "Collateral Murder" video, leaked by Chelsea Manning (pictured opposite, below) to Julian Assange (opposite, top). The shorter version is embedded within this article.

I write to ask if you will use the election campaign to speak up for Julian Assange, an unjustly imprisoned Australian journalist, who faces extradition from Britain to the United States. Through the Wikileaks news service, established in 2006, Julian revealed to the world war-crimes that United States' rulers wanted to remain concealed. One of the most infamous of those incidents was the 12 July 2007 "Collateral murder" in Iraq by the US crew of an Apache helicopter.

On that day, at least 18 unarmed people, including two journalists employed by Reuters, were killed, and two children injured, by three consecutive attacks from a US Apache helicopter in Baghdad, Iraq. After the incident the Apache crew were heard laughing at the "12 to 15" bodies on the ground and at the sight of a Humvee running over one of the injured.

A subsequent inquiry by the US Army found that the actions of the Apache crew were justified, purportedly because all those killed were armed insurgents. The US Army refused to tell Reuters how two of their staff were killed on that day. Reuters attempted to obtain the video through Freedom of Information requests, but were unsuccessful.

This criminal coverup of murder was thwarted, however, when Private Chelsea Manning, who had viewed the 39 minute video of the incident, gave a copy to Wikileaks. The full version of that Video can be viewed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is9sxRfU-ik . A shorter 18 minute version can be viewed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0 and is also embedded below. For revealing this and other evidence of US war crimes to Wikileaks, Chelsea Manning was sentenced in 2013 to 35 years in prison.

Collateral Murder - Wikileaks - Iraq

As a consequence of "Collateral Murder" and other revelations, Wikileaks has drawn the ferocious enmity from those vested interests who wanted to keep that that knowledge from us. For example, on 10 August 2016, Hillary Clinton strategist Bob Beckel said, "The way to deal with this is pretty simple. We've got special ops forces. I mean a dead man can't leak stuff. ... The guy ought to be - and I 'm not for the death penalty, so, if I 'm not for the death penalty, there's only one way to deal with it - illegally shoot the son of a bitch." (see 1:14 minute video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rImgsRg-a-8.

All of Wikileaks' material has been republished in the mainstream news all over the world, again and again. No journalist other than Julian Assange has been pursued or punished for doing this. In 2010, an investigation by the Australian Federal Police found that Julian Assange has committed no crime. He did the world a courageous service and Australia should protect him. Unfortunately the ALP, the Libs, and the Greens, do not seem to have the courage to stand up to America or the UK on this matter. As mentioned above, the only party, of which I am so far aware, is standing in this election and is campaigning for Julian Assange, is the Socialist Equity Party.

Will you also stand up for Julian Assange?

It is my hope that, by raising the issue of Julian Assange to independents and small party candidates now, I might help make it possible to have a parliament elected on 18 May that will act to get Julian Assange back to Australia safely.

Yours sincerely,

James Sinnamon
/JamesSinnamon

#appendix1" id="appendix1">Appendix: Candidates who support Julian Assange

Use the 'special relationship' to stop Assange extradition: Greens Senator Richard Di Natale

Australian Greens Leader and Foreign Affairs spokesperson Dr Richard Di Natale has called upon the Australian Government to swiftly intervene to ensure that Julian Assange is not extradited to the United States.

As found by the Australian Federal Police in 2010, Julian Assange has committed no crime.

Yet, Julian Assange, the courageous and visionary founding editor of Wikileaks, who is not even a citizen of the United States and has never been there, now faces the threat that he will be extradited to the United States from Britain. There he is to supposedly be tried only for the 'crime' of 'conspiring' in 2010, with Chelsea Manning to have her retrieve classified U.S. defence department information which revealed to the world evidence of U.S. war crimes. - the sort of 'crime' that many serious journalists have engaged in.

Dear Prime Minister Scott Morrison, I write to ask you to act to bring to an end circumstances faced by Julian Assange which certainly have already harmed his health and may well end his life if those circumstances are not rectified soon.

An investigation by the Australian Federal Police into Julian Assange ordered by former Prime Minister Julia Gillard in 2010, found that he had committed no crime.

In spite of that, he was threatened with extradition to the United States to face, in its rigged court system - as attested to by former CIA officer John Kiriakou, amongst others - charges that the United States is not even prepared to reveal to the public. Julian Assange, who is not even a United States' citizen, could face many years of imprisonment - or worse - for merely having made known, through Wikileaks, information that the public should know about world events of recent years.

To prevent this, he sought asylum inside the London Ecuadorian Embassy in October 2012. Asylum was granted to him by former Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa as required by International Law.

Unfortunately, Assange's asylum inside the Ecuadorian embassy has been turned by the British government into an illegal detention. This has been found twice - on 5 February 2016 and on 30 November 2016 by the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. This illegal detention has now lasted six and a half years and has had terrible consequences for Julian Assange's mental and physical health. In all this time, he has seen no sunlight, had little exercise and has been refused medical attention - clearly a violation of the spirit, if not the letter, of international law.

President Lenin Moreno, who succeeded President Rafael Correa in 2017, has made Julian Assange's already dire living situation worse - putting him under constant surveillance, denying him access to the Internet or even reading material and restricting visitors.

On top of this, there are rumours that the Ecuadorian government may soon expel Julian Assange from the Embassy. Should he be expelled he faces what he has endured so much up until now to avoid - extradition to the United States.

Surely, neither the extradition of Julian Assange to the United States, nor his continued confinement under the degrading conditions he has been made to endure for so long, are alternatives that should be acceptable to an Australian government showing a basic duty of care to each and every one of its citizens.

I therefore urgently request that you act now to end the illegal detention of Julian Assange. You could despatch today a contingent of Federal Police to fly to London, go to the Ecuadorian embassy and escort Julian Assange back to Heathrow Airport and thence back to Tullamarine Airport. I doubt if any British government authority would dare obstruct a contingent of Federal Police clearly acting to uphold the law and to end such a cruel denial of basic human rights.

Should your efforts to free Julian Assange somehow fail, you could try to ensure that he receives fair judicial process in the United States. He should be given an attorney of his choice funded by the Australian government and the United States be asked to conduct the trial in public. Certainly any charges arising from what is already been revealed to the public through Wikileaks should be tried in public.

Only then, if found guilty by a fair-minded and impartial jury, could any of what Julian Assange has endured since 2010 be seen to have been deserved. However, I believe that he would almost certainly be found not guilty if such a trial were to occur and he would then be able to walk free.

So, I appeal to you, even at this late stage, to use the powers vested in you to end Julian Assange's ordeal and to ensure that justice and the rule of law ultimately prevail in this instance.

Yours faithfully,

James Sinnamon

On Friday 5 April 2019, as revealed by John Pilger on Twitter from a high level source within the Ecuadorian Government, Julian Assange would shortly be expelled from the London Ecuadorian Embassy. Once evicted, he stands to be arrested by the UK police, extradited to the United States where he faces a secret trial based on a secret indictment. He may face many years behind bars - even the death penalty can't be excluded - all for just publishing, through Wikleaks, facts about world events that the public would be entitled to know in a fair and just world.

In 2010 then Prime Minister Julia Gillard, before Julian Assange was forced to seek asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy in October 2012, had ordered the Australian Federal Police to investigate Assange in the hope that they would find he had committed a crime. They found none.

In February 2016, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) stated that his detention was unlawful. This was reaffirmed by the Working Group in November 2015

An Australian government - if it was committed to the rule of law, free speech, human rights and democracy - could could act now to end the British government's illegal detention of Julian Assange in a matter of hours. It could send to London a contingent of Federal Police to escort Julian Assange out of the Ecuadorian Embassy back to Heathrow Airport and thence to Tullamarine Airport in Melbourne.

Were the British government to dare attempt to interfere with Australian Federal Police escorting Julian Assange back to Australia, the outcry would be enormous - from within Britain, Australia and the rest of the world.

However, not one Australian government, that of Prime Minister Julia Gillard, nor any of the subsequent governments- those of Prime Ministers Kevin Rudd, Tony Abbott, Malcolm Turnbull have enacted this basic duty of care towards Julian Assange. They have not even shown any sympathy for him, or interest.

Not one of the political parties with representation in parliament - The Liberals, the Nationals, Labor, the Greens, nor any of the Independent members have spoken up for Julian Assange. This seems an appalling failure of our parliamentary system and those members of Parliament who supposedly represent us. (One exception to this is the now demonised One Nation Party.)

What You Can Do

Give your first preference to candidates who promise to act for Julian Assange. With a federal election looming, it should now be possible to hold to account those elected members of Parliament who have behaved so shamefully towards Julian Assange. Where you are asked to vote for a sitting candidate from one of the major parties, ask him/her should vote for a candidate who has been silent - or worse - about Julian Assange. Where any other candidate asks for your vote ask him/her what he she intends to do for Julian Assange. Give your first and subsequent references to those who give the best responses and put the major parties last.

Attend protests for Julian Assange.

Post comments in support of Julian Assange on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.

Write articles in support of Julian Assange on any web-site on which you have an account.

See also: Be Ready To Act: WikiLeaks Source Says They’re Coming For Assange (5/4/19) by Caitlin Johnstone, The Gestapo Is Coming for Julian Assange (4/4/19) by Paul Craig Roberts.

The real 'matrix'. Barrett Brown, publisher and journalist talks to Chris Hedges about the US government’s war on Wikileaks, Assange and other outlets exposing the inner workings of power.

John Pilger reminds us of the 'journalists' who let down Julian Assange whilst profiting from the information he released. He reminds us how far down journalism has sunk. He uses the term 'Vichy-journalism' to good effect.

Transcript of John Pilger's magnificent speech on why Julian Assange is being persecuted, who is responsible, and the mass media role

[Headings have been inserted by Candobetter.net editor.]

JOHN PILGER: Thank you for coming for Julian. And thank you to the SEP for organising this important rally. The persecution of Julian Assange must end. Or it will end in tragedy
The Australian government of Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull have a historic opportunity to decide which it will be. They can remain silent, for which history will be unforgiving. Or they can act in the interests of justice and humanity and bring this remarkable Australian citizen home. Julian does not seek special treatment. The Australian Government has clear diplomatic and moral obligations to protect its citizens abroad from gross injustice.In Julian's case, from a gross miscarriage of justice and the extreme danger that awaits him, should he walk out of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London unprotected.

We know from the Chelsea Manning case what you in can expect if a US extradition warrant is successful. The United Nations has called it torture.

I know Julian well. I regard him as a close friend, a person of extraordinary resilience and courage. I've watched the tsunami of lies and smear engulf him endlessly, predictably, perfidiously, and I know why they smear him.

Secret US Defense Department document lays out how to destroy Assange

In 2008 a plan to destroyed both WikiLeaks and Julian was laid out in a secret document dated 8th of March 2008. The authors were the cyber counterintelligence assessment branch of the US Defense Department. They described in detail how important it was to destroy - and I quote - "the feeling of trust that WikiLeaks that is WikiLeaks center-of-gravity." This would be achieved, they wrote, "with threats of exposure and criminal prosecution and an unrelenting assault on reputation."

The aim was to silence and criminalize WikiLeaks and its editor and publisher. It was as if they planned a war on a single human being and on the very principle of freedom of speech.

Their weapon would be personal sphere and their assassins would be journalists, the very people who are meant to keep the record straight and tell us the truth.

The irony! The irony is that no-one has told these journalists what to do.

I call them Vichy-journalists, after the journalists who served the German occupation of war-time France.

Mainstream journalism decay: ABC's Sarah Ferguson, Sally Neighbor, the Guardian, and others

I've been a journalist for many years. I've never known such corruption of my craft. It is as if a world of illusions has consumed the last vestiges of honest media in the cause of decaying power, its wars and witch hunts. Let me give you one example. Last October, the ABC journalist, Sarah Ferguson, interviewed Hillary Clinton, over whom she fawned, and, as I quote, "the icon for your generation." This was the same Clinton who threatened to obliterate Iran and, as US Secretary of State in 2011, one of the instigators of the invasion and destruction of Libya as a modern state, with the loss of 40,000 lives. Like the invasion of Iraq, it was based on lies. When the Libyan president was murdered publicly and gruesomely with a knife, Clinton whooped and cheered. Thanks largely to her, Libya became a breeding ground for Isis and other jihadists.

Thanks largely to her, tens of thousands of refugees fled in peril across the Mediterranean and many of them drowned. In leaked emails, published by WikiLeaks , we know that Hillary Clinton's Foundation received millions of dollars from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the main backers of Isis and terrorism across the Middle East. From these disclosures we know that as Secretary of State, Clinton, approved the biggest arms deal ever, eighty billion dollars worth. Today Saudi Arabia is using these weapons to crush the starving and stricken people of Yemen.
Sarah Ferguson, the highly paid ABC reporter, raised not a word of this, with Hillary Clinton sitting in front of us. Instead she allowed Clinton to attack and smear Julian Assange as a lightweight, a tool of Russian intelligence, and a nihilistic opportunist who does the bidding of a dictator. Julian was offered no right of reply to this shocking interview, this orgy of defamation, broadcast by Australia's publicly funded state broadcaster.

As if this wasn't enough, Ferguson's executive producer, Sally Neighbor, followed the interview with a vicious retweet, "Assange is Putin's bitch."

We all know it. This is what I mean by corruption. This is what I mean by Vichy-journalism. It was an insult to the very meaning of journalism. There are many other examples.

The Guardian reputedly once a great liberal newspaper has conducted a vendetta against Julian Assange. Like a spurned lover, the Guardian has aimed its personal, petty, inhuman, and cowardly attacks at a man whose work it once published and profited from. It is as if Julian were fair game and too poor to sue for defamation. The former editor of the Guardian called the WikiLeaks, disclosures which his newspaper published in 2010, 'one of the greatest journalistic scoops of the last 30 years'. Awards were lavished on the paper as if Julian did not exist.

Wikileaks revelations became part of the Guardian's marketing plan to raise the newspaper's cover price. They made money, often big money, while WikiLeaks and Julian struggle to survive. With not a penny going to WikiLeaks a hyped Guardian book led to a lucrative Hollywood movie deal. The book's authors, Luke Harding and David Lee, gratuitously abused Assange as a damaged personality and callous. They also revealed the secret password Julian had given the Guardian in confidence and which was designed to protect a digital file containing the US Embassy cables.

With Julian trapped in the Ecuadorian Embassy, Luke Hardy of the Guardian, who had made big backs big bucks on the backs of Julian and Edward Snowden, stood among the police outside the embassy and gloated in his blog that Scotland Yard may get the last laugh.

This is how far the craft of journalism has sunk - Vichy-journalism. The question is why. Julian Assange has committed no crime. He has never been charged with a crime. The swedish episode was bogus and farcical and he has been vindicated

Witchhunts by some of the 'Left-leaning' and some 'feminists'

Karen Axelson and Lisa Longstaff of Women Against Rape summed it up when they wrote - and I quote them - "The allegations against Assange are a smokescreen, behind which a number of governments are trying to clamp down on WikiLeaks for having audaciously revealed to the public their secret planning of wars and occupations and their attendant rape, murder, and destruction. The authorities care so little about violence against women, but they manipulate rape allegations at will." Unquote. Most of this truth was lost or buried in a media witch hunt that disgracefully associated Julian with rape and misogyny. The witch hunt included voices who describe themselves as 'on the left' and as 'feminist'. Shame on them!

Failure to report on seriousness of danger to Assange

Throughout this fear campaign, the threat of Julian's extradition to a hellhole in the US was willfully ignored. Documents released by Edward Snowden showed Julian to be on what is called a 'manhunt target list'. One leaked official memo reads as follows, and I quote: "Assange is going to make a nice bride in prison. Screw the terrorists, you'll be eating cat food forever."
In Alexandra, Virginia, the suburban home of America's war-making elite, a secret grand jury, a throwback to the Middle Ages, has spent seven years trying to concoct a crime for which Julian Assange can be prosecuted. But this isn't easy because the US Constitution protects publishers, journalists, and whistleblowers.

Julian's crime is that he broke a silence. No investigative journalism in my lifetime can equal the importance of what WikiLeaks has done and the public service it has provided in calling rapacious Power to account. Julian and Wikileaks have pushed back a one-way moral screen to reveal that imperialism - our imperialism - the often disguised imperialism of liberal democracies is never benevolent or moral as it contrives to appear, as it is presented so often in the media, but committed to endless warfare to the conquest of our resources, our lives, our dignity, if we allow it.

When Harold Pinter, the great playwrite, accepted the Nobel Prize for literature in 2005, he referred to a vast tapestry of lies upon which we feed. He asked why, and I quote, "the systematic brutality, the widespread atrocities, the ruthless suppression of independent thought of the Soviet Union was well known in the west, while American imperial crimes quote 'never happened' even while they were happening they never happened." He was referring to the great silence.

Julian and WikiLeaks have smashed this silence and exposed how the imperial game is played by those with liberal pretensions. Their revelations have lifted the masks of those who regard whole nations in terms of their usefulness or expendability and that is why his life is in danger.

Prime Minister Turnbull

Seven years ago, here in Sydney, I arranged to meet a prominent Liberal member of the Federal Parliament, Malcolm Turnbull. I asked him to deliver an urgent appeal from Julian's lawyer to the government of Julia Gillard. Turnbull and I talked for several hours about Julian and his right to justice. He seemed [inaudible] sympathetic. We also talked about Turnbull's famous victory in the 1980s, when as a young lawyer, he had fought the British government's attempted to suppress free speech and prevent the publication of the book Spy Catcher in a way a WikiLeaks of the time, for it revealed the crimes of great power.

Prime Minister Gillard's ignorant and shocking attempts to cancel Assad's passport

When I met Turnbull, the Labour Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, had declared WikiLeaks illegal and wanted to cancel Julian's passport - in effect his birthright - until she was told she couldn't do it. She was told by the AFP she couldn't do it; that Julian had committed no crime, that WikiLeaks was a publisher; his work was protected under article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which Australia was one of the original signatories. In abandoning Julian Assange, an Australian citizen, and colluding in his persecution, Gillard's outrageous behavior forced the issue of Julian's recognition under international law as a political refugee. Tiny Ecuador invoked the 1951 convention and granted Julian refuge in the embassy. There was no question under international law that his life was in danger. Julia Gillard has recently been appearing with Hillary Clinton as 'pioneering feminist'. It is reassuring to know that political satire is back. In these gigs, Prime Minister Gillard has not referred to her distinction as the first Prime Minister on whose watch Australian soldiers were killed in Afghanistan. We know from WikiLeaks warlogs the atrocious nature of that imperial war in Afghanistan. If there's anything to remember Gillard by, it is a sychophantic embarassing speech she made to the US Congress soon after she demanded the the illegal cancellation of Julian's passport.

Will Canberra assume its responsibilities in order to avert tragedy and save this Australian hero?

Is that how we will remember Malcolm Turnbull? Julian's father has written to Malcolm Turnbull just the other day. It is a moving letter in which he has appealed to the prime minister to bring Julian home. He refers to the real possibility of a tragedy.

I have watched Julian's health deteriorate in the years of confinement without sunlight. He has a relentless cough, but is denied safe passage to and from the hospital for even an x-ray.
The Australian Government has the diplomatic power to intervene.

For years the governments in Canberra offered no help, no help to Julian. Now the responsibility of the Trunbull government could not be clearer. It goes to the very heart the very heart of human justice and morality. Malcolm Turnbull can remain silent or he can seize the opportunity and fulfill his government's obligations and defend the life of a man who is a true Australian hero.
He can bring Julian Assange home. The choice is his.

These speeches moved to a different address on you tube. We have located them again, for the moment. See article above this one for the transcript of John Pilger's excellent speech.
RALLIES ON TUESDAY 19 JUNE IN AUSTRALIA: Melbourne - outside the British Consulate 12-2PM (British Consulate General Melbourne, 17th Floor, 90 Collins St Melbourne). Will be attended by Julian's father, John Shipton and another young member of Julian's family and Shirley Shackleton. Brisbane - Vigil 4-6PM at the Ann Street Shrine of Remembrance opposite Central Station; Perth - 12PM-2PM at Forrest Chase.

The Socialist Equity Party should be applauded for having organised and recorded the June 17th protest speeches. We should not however forget that Julian Assange's work goes wider than worker protest. It goes to preventing globalist media, corporations and governments from taking away our rights as citizens of nations. The issues go to the nation itself and to the need for solidarity and communication between citizens, always, plus the recognition that Julian is one of us. This cause should be embraced by other forces as well as the Socialist Equity Party. Anyone who supports free speech, human and civil rights, and opposes war, should attend these protests and get others to attend with leaflets, posts to social media, and calls to talk-back radio etc.

Apologies: This article previously erroneously stated or implied that all rallies were to occur on the same day. In fact, on Sunday 17 June there will be one rally in Sydney, whilst on Tuesday 19 June, there will be other rallies in Melbourne Brisbane, Perth and, hopefully elsewhere.

The following has been adapted from Global protests to demand freedom for Julian Assange (2/6/18) | Class Consciousness.

In the coming weeks, including on 19 June, rallies have be organised for Julian Assange have been organised across Australia and across the world.

Demand that the Australian government act to abide by its duty of care to any Australian citizen and send to London a contingent of Federal Police to escort Julian Assange back to Australia.

Upcoming Rallies and protests in Australia

Sydney

Sunday, June 17th 1-3 PM, Socialist Equality Party Rally, Sydney Town Hall Square : Speakers include John Pilger and James Cogan SEP National Secretary. Endorsed by Julian Burnside QC and Terry Hicks (Father of David Hicks), Chris Hedges (Pullitzer Prizing winner Journalist), Professor Stuart Rees Facebook event and website

Tuesday June 19th 9AM – 1PM British Consulate Gateway Building, 1 Macquarie Place, Sydney

Melbourne

Vigil outside British Consulate, – Tuesday 19th .: Vigil will be attended by Julian's father, John Shipton and other young member of Julian's family will be in attendance. Julian is totally isolated from his friends and family whilst trapped in the Ecuadorean Embassy.

Speakers include :

Shirley Shackleton:whose journalist husband Greg was murdered by Indonesian force in Balibo on the eve of the Indonesian invasion of East Timor. Shirley fought for decades for the East Timorese and against the Australian government's cover up of her (and four other journalists).

James Cogan: National Secretary of the Socialist Equality Party (SEP):The Socialist Equality are playing a leading role in the campaign to defend Julian Assange and fight internet censorship. They have also called protests in Sydney, Tamil Nadu and Columbo and are publishing many articles on the campaign on the World Socialist Website.

Class-conscious website and Facebook event

Solidarity Light Vigil, Melbourne CBD – Tuesday 19th 6-8 PM Bring candles and loved ones to show support. Disarm Facebook Event

Brisbane

Vigil 4-6PM – June 19th, Ann Street Shrine of Remembrance, Ann Street, Brisbane City Centre (opposite Central Station) Facebook event

Perth

June 19th 12PM-2PM Forrest Chase : Facebook Event Page

Other Cities

If you are planning to host or know of any other cities who wish to participate in the June 19th actions for Julian, they are being coordinated through the Free Julian Assange at U.K and U.S. Embassies Worldwide Facebook page or send a message direct to the Class-conscious website via our Contact page. Like wise if you have additional details of speakers etc about already listed events, please pass that on too.

Julian Assange, the courageous innovative publisher of Wikileaks, who told the world the truth about US army torture of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib has been found by the united Nations to have been illegally held in indefinite detention since he was granted asylum by Ecuador in August 2012, due to the British and Swedish governments complicity with the United States. Now Australia has lost this citizen of global courage and action in defence of human rights, to Ecuador, which has just recently granted him citizenship. See "Julian Assange granted Ecuadorian citizenship to provide 'another layer of protection'".

The whole Assange case could have been resolved years ago, had the Swedish government given Assange a guarantee that he would not be extradited to the United States, should he go to Sweden to face charges (now dropped) of rape. The fact that no such undertaking was made by the Swedish government (supposedly neutral, but in reality an ally of the United States) clearly demonstrates that the charges of rape were no more than a ploy to arrest Assange and deliver him to the United States deep state.

Throughout this long detention and shameful denial of Julian Assange's human rights, Australian parliament has received letters and petitions asking for the government to help Julian Assange, as an Australian citizen and Victorian resident. To our knowledge, only Greens MPs, notably Scott Ludlum, and, at least once, Adam Bandt, have spoken up on the subject, especially in relation to Bills restricting Australian freedoms and expanding state surveillance. Prime Ministers Rudd and Gillard have been passive in their responses to questions about Assange's welfare, with Gillard actually making the public error of saying that Wikileaks was illegal. Basically no Australian government has stood up for Assange, even though they have occasionally protested that he has received the same rights as any Australian citizen. This has been denied by Assange and his mother. See, "Fed Govt defends its consular assistance to Assange," at http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2012/s3515562.htm. [See note for why we haven't actively linked to this ABC site.[1]] Most tellingly, the fact that the Australian government never denounced Assange as a criminal shows that they must have known he was not guilty of the charges against him. See our excerpts below from Hansard.

Hansard Documentation of how Australia handled Assange's detention and threats to his safety

...............................................................................................................................................................

Julie Bishop, Monday, 19 June 2017, responding to letter: Page: 6766,

"Dear Mr Vasta

Thank you for your letter of 20 March 2017 regarding the petition (PN0054) submitted by the Concerned Citizens of Australia to the Standing Committee on Petitions.

The petition refers to Opinion No.54/2015 of the UN Working Group on

Arbitrary Detention adopted on 4 December 2015, in which it considered that Mr Julian Assange was arbitrarily detained by the Governments of Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. In that opinion, the Working Group expressed the view that Mr Assange is 'entitled to his freedom of movement and to compensation'. The petition requests that the House of Representatives do all within its power to end Julian Assange's detention.

I received legal advice on the implications of the findings of the Working Group in February 2016. It is important for the Standing Committee on Petitions to appreciate that the Working Group's opinion is directed at the United Kingdom and Sweden; not Australia. Australia cannot intervene in the legal processes of another country, just as we would not countenance other states intervening in Australian legal processes. I also note that the opinions of the Working Group are not legally binding on states.

Mr Assange has been afforded due process by authorities in the United Kingdom, and has avoided lawful arrest by choosing to remain in the Ecuadorian Embassy. Mr Assange will need to address his situation through legal processes in the United Kingdom and Sweden, with the assistance of his legal advisers.

However, the Australian Government stands ready to provide Mr Assange with the same consular assistance it would give to any other Australian in these circumstances should he request it, in accordance with the Consular Services Charter. I enclose a copy for the Standing Committee's consideration.

I trust this information is of assistance.

Yours sincerely

from the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Ms Bishop." Monday, 19 June 2017

Page: 6766, House of Representatives, Parliament of Australia.

Senator Ludlam, West Australia, 4 July 2011

"Under existing law, the collection of foreign intelligence is confined to the collection of intelligence concerning the activities of foreign governments, organisa­tions they control or foreign political organisations for the purpose of the defence of Australia or the conduct of international affairs. That is how ASIO have been doing the work that they have been doing in tracking al-Qaeda and tracking terrorist organisations that are much closer to home operating in our neighbourhood. They have these powers. They use them extensively. It is the sole justification that has been given to us for why their staffing and their budget quadrupled in the last decade. It is precisely because they have the range of powers that they need to track non-state actors who mean Australians harm or mean to pursue violent political activities in other countries. They have the powers that they need. When we asked what exactly this was all about, nobody was able to tell us.

What it does do is that it permits ASIO much wider scope to investigate the activities of Australians who are overseas and who do not necessarily pose a threat but perhaps do have implications for foreign relations, such as Julian Assange and other people working in the WikiLeaks organisation. WikiLeaks and Mr Assange obviously have implications for Australia's foreign relations. Things falling out of the document drop were on the front page of every newspaper in the country day after day after day six months ago, and even now those shock waves continue to reverberate through the diplomatic community. So there is no way that you can say that there are no implications there for Australia's foreign relations. But should that entity be spied on by ASIO? Should our clandestine Cold War era spy agency be tracking down Mr Assange, maybe his family if they travel abroad, people working for that organisation, journalists, or people he is talking to or that that organisation is involved with? It appears that the reason that this bill has been known as the 'WikiLeaks amendment' in the Attorney's department is that that is precisely what is intended. The committee simply did not address that issue, and neither did the officer at the table when we asked during the inquiry. This is one example of how a person or organisation outside Australia, combined with the notion of Australia's foreign relations, very considerably expands the scope of ASIO's activities. Australians working overseas for firms that are major rivals to key Australian industries would also be covered. They would be caught by the economic wellbeing argument. If the government has a counterargument to this, it would be delightful to hear it." Senator Ludlam, West Australia, 4 July 2011, BILLS - Intelligence Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 - Second Reading,

Senator Ludlam, Petitions Wikileaks, 9 February 2011

"To the Honourable President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled:

The Petition of the undersigned shows:

1. That Mr Julian Assange is an Australian Citizen.

2. That on 2nd December 2010 the Prime Minister stated that the publishing of certain information on the Wikileaks website by Mr Assange was “An Illegal thing to do”.

3. That the Attorney-General of Australia has stated that he has considered the cancellation of the Australian Passport held by Mr Assange.

4. United States Politician, Ms Sarah Palin, has called for Mr Assange to be “hunted down”.

5. Mr Tom Flanagan, Senior Advisor to the Canadian Prime Minister has, on public television, called for Mr Assange’s assassination.

Your petitioner requests that the Senate:

1. Call upon the Prime Minister to explain to the Senate the basis for her allegation against a fellow Australian citizen that he is a criminal.

2. Call upon the Attorney-General to state to the Senate whether he received any request for the cancellation of Mr Assange’s Australian Passport pursuant to the Australian Passports Act.

3. Call upon the Minister for Foreign Affairs to summon the Ambassador for from the United States of America to Australia and demarche condemning the comments of Ms Patin. [sic - meant Palin.]

4. Call upon the Minister for Foreign Affairs to summon the Canadian High Commissioner to Australia and demarche condemning the comments of Mr Flanagan.

5. Call upon the Governor-General of Australia to provide such protection and assistance to Mr Assange as to which he may stand in need. "

Senator Ludlam, Petitions Wikileaks, 9 February 2011,

Senator Ludlam, West Australia, 3 March, 2014

"I wonder whether the Attorney-General might rise to the occasion, as it were, and provide us with some information as to why he will not back up on the public record, neither here in this chamber nor even at an estimates committee last week, how he is able to accuse Mr Edward Snowden the whistleblower of being a traitor when he has been neither charged nor convicted of any crime in the United States, when senior US administration figures have been careful not to use that phrase and when he cannot prove or show any evidence whatsoever that Australians have been put in harm's way? Similar claims were put about publisher Julian Assange when the WikiLeaks documents were first put into the public domain. And unless Senator Brandis is about to prove me wrong, we are about to see debate in here closed down." Senator Ludlam, West Australia, 3 March, 2014, National Security - Order for the Production of Documents,

Senator Ludlam, W.A. Australian Greens, 7 February, 2017

"We let Australian citizen Julian Assange and his courageous colleagues hang out to dry for disclosing war crimes in Iraq and more conventional crimes revealed in the state department cables. When the United States government says jump, then, if we are lucky, our Intelligence and Security Committee will do a rapid bipartisan inquiry into how high. But inevitably, we jump." Senator Ludlam, W.A. Australian Greens, 7 February, 2017, "ADJOURNMENT - Australia-United States Relationship,"

Michael Danby, MP, Melbourne Ports, 1 December 2014, Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill, (No.1) 2014

"I want to end with this discordant note. It is not surprising to see the Greens political party lead the charge against this proposed legislation. In my view, the Greens seem to have an automatic Pavlovian kind of reaction to undermining the intelligence capabilities of our country. People like the Greens political party's Senator Ludlam have publicly supported self-appointed protectors of privacy and trust—stalwarts of moral standing like Julian Assange. Of course, the Greens' backing of Julian Assange and his ideological stablemate Edward Snowden has not exposed a single piece of evidence of the abuse of privacy or citizens' rights in authoritarian countries like Russia. Mr. Assange, the Greens' hero, used to host a program on the Russian disinformation network RT. To give you a flavour for his content and his policies, his first interview gave an armchair ride to Hezbollah's feared terrorist leader, Sheikh Hussein Nasrallah.

Indeed, it is delicious irony that the Greens' other hero, Edward Snowden, preaches excessive oversight and accountability but chooses to reside in Russia, of all places. He destroyed his credibility when popping up on Russian TV a few months ago to give another soft-serve Dorothy Dixer to the new Russian tsar, Vladimir Putin. Perhaps the Greens believe Russia is actually a bastion of human rights. Certainly, Senator Rhiannon used to believe that. I am honoured with the fact that Senator Ludlum has put a fatwa on the Greens speaking to me because I pointed out Senator Rhiannon's political similarity to the wife of the Romanian dictator, Elena Ceausescu. But the main point I make about her is she has never dissociated herself from her membership and participation in the pro-Soviet Communist political party in Australia. It was a seamless transition to the Greens.

Of course, the serious people in this parliament can smirk about Snowden's choice of patrons and about Assange's presence on RT. But it is hard to believe that here, in this House, we have parliamentarians that oppose legislation and seek to foil the efforts of our Defence forces and cooperation with our security services overseas. It occurs to me that the Greens political party ought to be more concerned about people losing their heads than about the people holding the swords. We had the appeasers in the 1930s. Eighty years later we have the Greens." Michael Danby, MP, Melbourne Ports, 1 December 2014, Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill, (No.1) 2014,

See also, Greg Barns, "Now is the time for Australia to finally stick up for Julian Assange," The Drum, 12 May, 2015. :

Prime Minister Gillard responds to question from Adam Bandt, MP, Greens in House of Representatives, Australian Parliament, Questions without Notice, 13 May 2015:

"Mr BANDT (Melbourne) (14:34): My question is to the Prime Minister. Senior figures in the United States have called for Julian Assange to be hunted down and in the US courts he may face the death penalty. Has the government sought an assurance from the United States that he will not be prosecuted. What steps has the government taken, or will the government take, to prevent Julian Assange being taken to the United States? Will the government put the interests of Washington ahead of the liberty of an Australian citizen and the freedom of the press?"

"Ms GILLARD (Lalor—Prime Minister) (14:35): I thank the member for Melbourne for his question. I know that he is raising an issue that is on the minds of many Australians as result of the recent news about the decision in the UK on the extradition matter involving Mr Assange. Can I assure the House of the following: the Australian government is providing full consular assistance to Mr Assange, as it does for all Australian citizens. I am advised that Australian consular officials visited Mr Assange on a number of occasions during his period of detention in London and raised several matters of concern with prison authorities on his behalf. Australian consular officials have attended all of Mr Assange's court appearances, including yesterday's hearing.

Since Mr Assange was released on bail, Australian officials have repeatedly conveyed offers of consular assistance through his lawyers, with whom they were most recently in contact yesterday. Swedish authorities have confirmed that any legal action against Mr Assange will be conducted in accordance with due process. As the Minister for Foreign Affairs has said today, at this stage we do not have any advice from the United States that there is an indictment against Mr Assange or that the United States has decided to seek his extradition. If at any stage in the future Mr Assange faces legal proceedings from the United States we would, for Mr Assange—as we would for any other Australian citizen—seek assurances from the United States in relation to due process. The Australian government cannot interfere in the judicial processes of other countries, but of course we will continue to closely monitor proceedings against Mr Assange and continue to provide full consular assistance to him." 13 May, 2015,

See also: "Prime Minister Julia Gillard has been left floundering after she labelled the actions of the WikiLeaks 'illegal', but couldn't say how" (24 February 2015) | SBS

Mr Rudd responding to a letter re Assange, 4 July 2011

Dear Mr Murphy,

I refer to your letter of 16 March 2011. regarding a petition about Mr Julian Assange, submitted for the consideration of the Standing Committee on Petitions. I note the Committee's referral under Standing Order 209(b) of items 3 and 4 of the petition. My response follows.

Item 3 called upon me to summon the Ambassador for the United States of America to Australia and demarche him condemning the comments of American politician Ms Sarah Palin on Mr Assange. Item 4 called upon me to summon the Canadian High Commissioner to Australia and demarche him condemning the comments of Mr Tom Flanagan, former Senior Advisor to the Canadian Prime Minister, on Mr Assange.

The Australian Government deplores and condemns all calls to violence against any Aus­tralian citizen wherever and by whomever they are made. However, neither of the individuals in the petition cited are holders of public office in their respective countries so it would not be app­ropriate to demarche their governments through their diplomatic representatives on statements they are reported to have made. Both the United States of America and Canada have laws protecting the rights of individuals against threats to their person. under which any concerns about these reported statements could be pursued.

I trust this information will be of assistance to the Committee in its consideration of the petition. from the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Rudd, 4 July 2011

NOTES

[1] The reason we have not linked to the Assange article on the ABC is because the ABC does not have an SSL certificate for this article. That means that if we link to it, oversensitive browsers will say that candobetter.net is linking to unsafe links. SSL certificates are security certificates. Just because the ABC does not have an SSL certificate, it does not mean the site isn't safe; it just means that it hasn't paid its protection money to issuers of SSL certificates. But your browser may tell you that it is unsafe - so we don't actively link.

Fears are increasing that something terrible has happened to Julian Assange, the Australian who founded Wikileaks and exposed power elites in the United States - most recently through 'Pizzagate'. We really hope that these fears are groundless, but police presence has been removed from the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, where Assange has been sequestered since 2012. The Anonymous video inside this article gives more detail than any other source, analysing and timelining what has happened recently with Assange. You need to start about 37 seconds in to avoid an overly long intro. Please contact candobetter.net if you have information about Assange. The Australian Government should be inquiring into his welfare - but they have failed totally to defend his rights now for years.

It is Mrs Hillary Clinton who should be in prison, not Julian Assange. For anyone who is still confused about what on earth Wikileaks has demonstrated about Hilary Clinton, watch this very clear interview by Australia's most famous independent Australian journalist, John Pilger and check the transcript below the video. Assange makes perfectly clear the association between Saudi Arabia and ISIS and Saudi Arabia and the Clinton Foundation. It shows that Hillary Clinton, whilst Secretary of State (!), knew and knows that the Saudi Arabian and Qatar governments were and are funding ISIS. This relationship with terrorism has been going on for years. The Australian Government and opposition must also know this. And, the Australian government, by not getting Assange safely back home is spectacularly failing its obligations to protect its own citizens from persecution. Our government is a cowardly lackey to the United States and the opposition and the Greens are just as bad because they say nothing about this. Our press protects this collusive silence. Assange is without doubt a courageous world figure and an Australian hero, but without Australia's intervention, Assange risks being thrown into a dungeon, like Chelsea Manning - with a mockery trial in the United States, should he step outside the Ecuadorian Embassy. Transcript inside, first published on RT at http://on.rt.com/7ty5 as "Assange: Clinton is a cog for Goldman Sachs & the Saudis (John Pilger exclusive video & transcript)"with multiple pictures and links which we have not published here.

Transcript from RT:

Whistleblower Julian Assange has given one of his most incendiary interviews ever in a John Pilger Special, courtesy of Dartmouth Films, in which he summarizes what can be gleaned from the tens of thousands of Clinton emails released by WikiLeaks this year.

http://dcleaks.com/ have revealed that billionaire, George Soros, has used billions of dollars to try to bring about open borders by funding NGOs all over the world to harass people who do not want mass immigration. Tactics taught are to equate all immigrants with refugees and to accuse people who want control over immigration numbers of racism.

Hackers have revealed that Australia's GetUp, like its U.S. counterparts, MoveOn and Avaaz, have massive financial support from Soros and that their agendas conform to those of Soros. Labor Leader Bill Shorten is linked to Soros-funded activities as is Greens Sarah Hanson-Young.

Bill Shorten, Australia's opposition leader and GetUp.

"GetUp! was established by ­activists Jeremy Heimans and David Madden with funding from Soros. The Labor-affiliated Construction Forestry Mining Energy Union donated $1.1 million to the group. Bill Shorten and John Hewson are former board members. A major funder listed on its 2014-15 Australian Electoral Commission expenditure return is Avaaz, the US GetUp! ­affiliate that has received copious amounts of funding from Soros networks."[1]

Now we have some idea why Bill Shorten refuses to reduce immigration. How many politicians have been influenced this way by Soros's money - either as recipients of awards, and positions or through funding? (We also know that every recent prime minister and opposition leader has become a member of the Australian Multicultural Foundation, which seems to have similar mass immigration values and leadership program links but no apparent affiliation with Soros. The Scanlon Foundation has mass immigration and opinion shaping agendas but no apparent links.)

Soros's money has influenced 'Leadership programs' in many areas, university grants and journalism in Australia. Google "Open Society Foundations". [2] Consider the impact of this on the formation of Australian politicians, researchers, academics, journalists, presenters, teachers, 'ethnic leaders' etc. Emily's list, for women aspiring to get ahead in politics, is financed by Soros, so we know now why the women who get ahead in Australian Labor have nothing serious to say about population or the natural environment.

The Australian Greens

Greens Leader Sarah Hanson Young was named a 'World economic forum young global leader' for 2016. George Soros is the chairman of that forum. [3] The Greens have, over the past decade or so, changed from a conservation platform to an open borders one employing the tactics of unfairly stigmatising people as racist and xenophobic when they call for limits on economic immigration in order to protect our natural environment.[4] Who or what changed so many of them?

"They attack democratic states by advocating a porous border policy, ­reframing illegal immigrants as refugees and degrading critics of totalitarian tendencies such as ­Islamism in orchestrated campaigns of PC censorship. Documents uncovered by Soros leaks reveal a pattern of funding for programs that prosecute porous borders, mass immigration into the Wes­t nations from Islamist regions, and overt campaigns against dissenters. OSF has provided several million to the Centre for American Progress, whose programs ­include the explicit targeting of free­thinkers critical of Islamism. A recent program grant described a strategy to target six critics of ­Islamism and the “right-wing media” in an “audit of Islamophobic activities”." [1]

Need to list Australian organisations and people linked to Opens Societies Foundations

There is a list available of United States organisations funded by Soros, but none available of Australian ones. Nonetheless, the U.S. list is very informative of the kinds of organisations that Soros has used to undermine national sovereignty.

'Independent' on line newspaper,New Matilda, praises South Africa's Mail and Guardian, calling for more papers like these and noting approvingly that they are backed by the Open Foundations Society.

"The twist, with South Africa’s Mail and Guardian, is revealed inside its front cover: its investigative reporting is supported by the Open Society Institute. To justify that, of course, it has to be clear that journalism is worth having, and capable of fulfilling a socially useful function as a civic tool in democracy." https://newmatilda.com/2012/06/19/journalism-we-really-need/

NOTES

[1] Jennifer Oriel, "Dumped files show influence of George Soros on Western politics, The Australian, August 22, 2016, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/dumped-files-show-influence-of-george-soros-on-western-politics/news-story/937a225e62420ea3807bd8308b0dad83
[2] For example: https://blogs.adelaide.edu.au/rb-bulletin/2015/05/26/open-society-foundations-open-society-fellowship-20152016/, http://www.uq.edu.au/uqadvantage/robert-walter, http://findanexpert.unimelb.edu.au/display/person460793#tab-research, International journalism grants: https://www.icij.org/about; Leadership programs: https://cpd.org.au/author/phil-lynch/ and Open Society Foundations: https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/press-releases/open-society-foundations-launch-worldwide-fund-support-nonprofits-navigating; and so on - just keep googling. So many of our academics, researchers, politicians, journalists, have received funding from The Open Society Foundations (George Soros) and to get this funding they had to conform to its values and tactics.
[3] http://greens.org.au/news/sa/sarah-hanson-young-named-world-economic-forum-young-global-leader-2016
[4] "Greens members harassed for expressing valid views on environment and population" and "Greens population activist threatened with expulsion"

What are we to make of Hillary Clinton's emails, recently revealed by Wikileaks? Here we examine the first two that were released. "In my view Clinton is as mad as a cut snake. You will see through these documents that the emphasis is entirely on Israel's interests, not America's, and whatever she thinks they are not the same. Of course she is completely in the hands of the Zionist lobby, as was Australia's recent Prime Minister Gillard, who lent her services to the Clinton campaign. But then Clinton is in the hands of anyone with money and the power to swing votes. She talks of Israel's security dilemma. Well, that's a good one: a state with an estimated 200-400 nuclear weapons (yes, a couple would be enough) facing states without even one has a security dilemma? ..." (Earth to Earth, Turkey.)

Mad as a cut snake?

Earth to Earth, writes about Hillary's emails:

"In my view Clinton is as mad as a cut snake. You will see through these documents that the emphasis is entirely on Israel's interests, not America's, and whatever she thinks they are not the same. Of course she is completely in the hands of the Zionist lobby, as was Australia's recent Prime Minister Gillard, who lent her services to the Clinton campaign. But then Clinton is in the hands of anyone with money and the power to swing votes. She talks of Israel's security dilemma. Well, that's a good one: a state with an estimated 200-400 nuclear weapons (yes, a couple would be enough) facing states without even one has a security dilemma?

She talks of trading off Syria for Iran, i.e. if the United States removes Bashar al-Assad then Israel might not attack Iran. We know this is what both Israel and Saudi Arabia were encouraging in the time of the Bush administration. They wanted the U.S. to do it. Can anyone imagine what the consequences would be of military strikes on live nuclear reactors?

Yet here Clinton talks of such a war as if it's something on the supermarket shelf she can't decide whether to pick up. In the second email, she talks of U.S. reluctance to launch an air war on Syria. In fact that is exactly what it wanted, but was blocked by Russia. (Thank heavens!) Never mind, says Clinton, we can do it without the U.N. and Russia won't object.

This is total crap. From the word go, it was clear that Russia had far too much invested in Syria, in the preservation of a government chosen by the Syrian people and in the preservation of its own regional and global strategic concerns, to let Syria go. Clinton thinks the U.S. could just walk in and bomb the Syrian air force into submission. This was never going to happen and clearly someone with more sense than Clinton prevailed. She says that Syria is not like Libya, where the 'opposition' was unified (I think this is the word she uses.) Again, crap. There was never any Libyan opposition strong enough to fight any further than the municipal limits of Benghazi. The 'rebels' were the window dressing for the full scale air assault by the U.S., Britain and France. At no stage were they unified. These emails at least help us to understand why Clinton could be the/one of the most dangerous U.S. presidents ever elected. Don't forget her threat to obliterate Iran if it attacks Israel (never likely - it would be the other way around but geared to look like an Iranian attack or a preemptive Israeli attack) and don't forget her threat of a few days ago, to renew the war on Syria and destroy Assad. Where we started we finish: this is exactly what Israel wants and there is absolutely nothing in it for the U.S. How shocking is it that the mainstream media has closed ranks behind this lying, corrupt and very dangerous person and has launched the most vicious campaign I have ever seen against a presidential candidate, Donald Trump." (Earth to Earth, Turkey)

WMDs all over again

Iran has been inspected and reinspected for nuclear weapons, revealing none, like the weapons of mass destructionn (WMDs) that did not exist in Iraq, but these two emails from Hillary Clinton (recently available by Wikileaks) reveal a focus on the idea that Iran may develop nuclear weapons capability. Israel is not officially supposed to have nuclear weapons, but Mordechai Vanunu, a former Israeli nuclear technician and peace activist revealed details of Israel's nuclear weapons program to the British press in 1986.[1] In Hillary Clinton's emails below, which were written in 2012, she operates on the premise that Israel has nuclear weapons and that the United States approves of this and wants Israel to maintain nuclear hegemony in the region. She sees solidarity between Iran and Syria as inimical to this state of affairs, reflecting the US claim that Iran aims to develop nuclear weapons as a deterrent to Israel bossing the region around. She says, "The result would be a precarious nuclear balance in which Israel could not respond to provocations with conventional military strikes on Syria and Lebanon, as it can today." Of course its Arab enemies accuse Israel itself of provocation and Israel has a history of acts of terrorism.[2] Hillary Clinton also suggests that, if Iran got nuclear weapons then Saudi Arabia might expect nuclear weapons. But that hasn't stopped the United States supplying Saudi Arabia with every other kind of weapon, as its top world customer.[3]

Casual promotion of mayhem

In order to prevent the mooted scenario of an independent Arab state catching up with Israel, Clinton recommends destroying the relationship between Syria and Iran by destroying the Syrian government by promoting a civil war. Well we now know the result of Hillary's preferred policy has been mayhem in Syria and Iraq, spreading all the way to Europe in the largest wave of refugees since the second world war. Clinton gives her opinion that if Iran were to get nuclear weapons it could use them as a deterrent to Israel's military threats in the region, yet she also reveals that she believes that Israel is on the point of "launching an attack on Iran that could provoke a major Mideast war". [Ed. This email was written some time in May 2012 and Israel has not engaged in nuclear attacks on the region yet.]

Poor predictability of her policies and failure to see their consequences

She also claims that Russia would not "stand in the way" if the [United States] were to intervene in Syria (meaning stoke war there). But she is writing some time in May 2012 and Putin only became Russian president in May 2012. (Relatedly, Clinton also reveals that she knew the US had stirred the pot in Kosovo.) These emails are now about four years and a few months old. Since Hillary wrote them, we have seen that Russia finally did intervene in Syria, although it stayed out of that fight for as long as possible. It unwisely failed to veto US interference in Libya, but the consequences of US/NATO intervention in Libya were so horrible that it became unlikely that Putin would go along with such a thing again. US interference in Ukraine put Russia in a position where it had to draw a line as it became clear that the US was surrounding Russia with military bases and attempting, through NATO, to alienate Russia's allies and trade partners.

It seems that Hillary's United States wants to use Israel to promote its own interests in the Middle East but this would go against Russia's and Arab interests, with the exception of Arab states, such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which have aligned with Israel and the United States/NATO. Qatar and Saudi Arabia are financing religious terrorism (ISIS and others) against Syria, Iraq and Libya. Turkey, led by a pro-Muslim Brotherhood president,[4] was seen as a US/NATO ally and was benefiting by buying cheap oil through ISIS but it relies a lot on trade with Russia and recently has apologised to Russia for shooting down a Russian plane.

Hillary advocates for the most brutal regimes, not against them

Hillary's reductionist descriptions[5] of the presidents of the only two secular states in the Middle East - Libya (now destroyed by US/NATO) and Syria - as brutal dictators - are being used to justify her recommendation of US intervention to create civil wars all over the Middle East and to destroy Syria and isolate Iran. Going into the future, towards this scenario, Saudi Arabia has been allowed to maintain among the most brutal regimes on the planet, with total subjugation of women as slaves; it has been allowed to engage in genocidal war in Yemen, not only with impunity, but Mr Trad, Saudi Arabia’s ambassador at the UN in Geneva, was elected as chair of a panel of independent experts on the UN Human Rights Council in June 2014. Meanwhile Ms Clinton is part of a U.S./NATO wolf-pack that pretends to be 'intervening' in the Middle East to rid it of 'brutal dictators'.

Where Trump seeks dialogue, Clinton wants war

What can we make of these emails, of the woman who wrote them, of the country that she represented as Secretary of State, of her candidacy for its president? For what reason should the world allow Israel to defend its position and call the shots in the region, on behalf of non-regional players who are interested in controlling the region's oil and challenging Russia and China's interests in the region? It seems obvious that Israel must share some of its territory with a new Arab state called Palestine, sooner or later, and disarm its nuclear stores. It seems obvious that the United States should establish good relations with Russia, which could help balance out expansionary ideas in China or for a caliphate in a damaged Middle East, instead of ramping up its military displays in Europe and pushing at Russia's borders.

And here are Hillary Clinton's emails:

The best way to help Israel deal with Iran's growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad.

Negotiations to limit Iran's nuclear program will not solve Israel's security dilemma. Nor will they stop Iran from improving the crucial part of any nuclear weapons program — the capability to enrich uranium. At best, the talks between the world's major powers and Iran that began in Istanbul this April and will continue in Baghdad in May will enable Israel to postpone by a few months a decision whether to launch an attack on Iran that could provoke a major Mideast war.

Iran's nuclear program and Syria's civil war may seem unconnected, but they are. For Israeli leaders, the real threat from a nuclear-armed Iran is not the prospect of an insane Iranian leader launching an unprovoked Iranian nuclear attack on Israel that would lead to the annihilation of both countries. What Israeli military leaders really worry about -- but cannot talk about -- is losing their nuclear monopoly. An Iranian nuclear weapons capability would not only end that nuclear monopoly but could also prompt other adversaries, like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, to go nuclear as well. The result would be a precarious nuclear balance in which Israel could not respond to provocations with conventional military strikes on Syria and Lebanon, as it can today.

If Iran were to reach the threshold of a nuclear weapons state, Tehran would find it much easier to call on its allies in Syria and Hezbollah to strike Israel, knowing that its nuclear weapons would serve as a deterrent to Israel responding against Iran itself.

Back to Syria. It is the strategic relationship between Iran and the regime of Bashar Assad in Syria that makes it possible for Iran to undermine Israel's security — not through a direct attack, which in the thirty years of hostility between Iran and Israel has never occurred, but through its proxies in Lebanon, like Hezbollah, that are sustained, armed and trained by Iran via Syria. The end of the Assad regime would end this dangerous alliance. Israel's leadership understands well why defeating Assad is now in its interests. Speaking on CNN's Amanpour show last week, Defense Minister Ehud Barak argued that "the toppling down of Assad will be a major blow to the radical axis, major blow to Iran.... It's the only kind of outpost of the Iranian influence in the Arab world...and it will weaken dramatically both Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza."

Bringing down Assad would not only be a massive boon to Israel's security, it would also ease Israel's understandable fear of losing its nuclear monopoly. Then, Israel and the United States might be able to develop a common view of when the Iranian program is so dangerous that military action could be warranted. Right now, it is the combination of Iran's strategic alliance with Syria and the steady progress in Iran's nuclear enrichment program that has led Israeli leaders to contemplate a surprise attack — if necessary over the objections of Washington. With Assad gone, and Iran no longer able to threaten Israel through its, proxies, it is possible that the United States and Israel can agree on red lines for when Iran's program has crossed an unacceptable threshold. In short, the White House can ease the tension that has developed with Israel over Iran by doing the right thing in Syria.

The rebellion in Syria has now lasted more than a year. The opposition is not going away, nor is the regime going to accept a diplomatic solution from the outside. With his life and his family at risk, only the threat or use of force will change the Syrian dictator Bashar Assad's mind.

Email from Hillary Clinton: UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05794498 Date: 11/30/2015

The Obama administration has been understandably wary of engaging in an air operation in Syria like the one conducted in Libya for three main reasons. Unlike the Libyan opposition forces, the Syrian rebels are not unified and do not hold territory. The Arab League has not called for outside military intervention as it did in Libya. And the Russians are opposed.

Libya was an easier case. But other than the laudable purpose of saving Libyan civilians from likely attacks by Qaddafi's regime, the Libyan operation had no long-lasting consequences for the region. Syria is harder. But success in Syria would be a transformative event for the Middle East. Not only would another ruthless dictator succumb to mass opposition on the streets, but the region would be changed for the better as Iran would no longer have a foothold in the Middle East from which to threaten Israel and undermine stability in the region.

Unlike in Libya, a successful intervention in Syria would require substantial diplomatic and military leadership from the United States. Washington should start by expressing its willingness to work with regional allies like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar to organize, train and arm Syrian rebel forces. The announcement of such a decision would, by itself, likely cause substantial defections from the Syrian military. Then, using territory in Turkey and possibly Jordan, U.S. diplomats and Pentagon officials can start strengthening the opposition. It will take time. But the rebellion is going to go on for a long time, with or without U.S. involvement.

The second step is to develop international support for a coalition air operation. Russia will never support such a mission, so there is no point operating through the UN Security Council. Some argue that U.S. involvement risks a wider war with Russia. But the Kosovo example shows otherwise. In that case, Russia had genuine ethnic and political ties to the Serbs, which don't exist between Russia and Syria, and even then Russia did little more than complain.

Russian officials have already acknowledged they won't stand in the way if intervention comes.

Arming the Syrian rebels and using western air power to ground Syrian helicopters and airplanes is a low-cost high payoff approach. As long as Washington's political leaders stay firm that no U.S. ground troops will be deployed, as they did in both Kosovo and Libya, the costs to the United States will be limited. Victory may not come quickly or easily, but it will come. And the payoff will be substantial. Iran would be strategically isolated, unable to exert its influence in the Middle East. The resulting regime in Syria will see the United States as a friend, not an enemy. Washington would gain substantial recognition as fighting for the people in the Arab world, not the corrupt regimes. For Israel, the rationale for a bolt from the blue attack on Iran's nuclear facilities would be eased. And a new Syrian regime might well be open to early action on the frozen peace talks with Israel. Hezbollah in Lebanon would be cut off from its Iranian sponsor since Syria would no longer be a transit point for Iranian training, assistance and missiles. All these strategic benefits and the prospect of saving thousands of civilians from
murder at the hands of the Assad regime (10,000 have already been killed in this first year of civil war).

With the veil of fear lifted from the Syrian people, they seem determine to fight for their freedom. America can and should help them — and by doing so help Israel and help reduce the risk of a wider war.

Wikileaks has launched a searchable archive for 30,322 emails & email attachments sent to and from Hillary Clinton's private email server while she was Secretary of State.

NOTES

[1] Mordechai Vanunu (Hebrew: מרדכי ואנונו‎‎; born 14 October 1954), also known as John Crossman,^{#cite_note-2">[2]#cite_note-3">[3]} is an Israeli former nuclear technician and peace activist^{#cite_note-4">[4]} who, citing his opposition to weapons of mass destruction, revealed details of Israel's nuclear weapons program to the British press in 1986.^{#cite_note-nyt2004-5">[5]#cite_note-6">[6]} He was subsequently lured to Italy by a Mossad agent, where he was drugged and abducted by Israeli intelligence agents.^{#cite_note-nyt2004-5">[5]} He was transported to Israel and ultimately convicted in a trial that was held behind closed doors.^{#cite_note-nyt2004-5">[5]}

Vanunu spent 18 years in prison, including more than 11 in solitary confinement. Released from prison in 2004, he became subject to a broad array of restrictions on his speech and movement. Since then he has been arrested several times for violations of those restrictions, including giving various interviews to foreign journalists and attempting to leave Israel. He says he suffered "cruel and barbaric treatment" at the hands of Israeli authorities while imprisoned, and suggests that his treatment would have been different if he had not converted to Christianity from Judaism.^{#cite_note-7">[7]}

In 2007, Vanunu was sentenced to six months in prison for violating terms of his parole. The sentence was considered unusual even by the prosecution who expected a suspended sentence. In response, Amnesty International issued a press release on 2 July 2007, stating that "The organisation considers Mordechai Vanunu to be a prisoner of conscience and calls for his immediate and unconditional release."^{#cite_note-8">[8]} In May 2010, Vanunu was arrested and sentenced to three months in jail on a charge that he met foreigners in violation of conditions of his 2004 release from jail.

Vanunu has been characterized internationally as a whistleblower^{#cite_note-9">[9]#cite_note-10">[10]} and by Israel as a traitor.^{#cite_note-11">[11]#cite_note-12">[12]#cite_note-13">[13]} Daniel Ellsberg has referred to him as "the preeminent hero of the nuclear era".^{#cite_note-14">[14] Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordechai_Vanunu}

See also: Kennedy, the Lobby and the bomb, previously published (2/5/2013) on VoltaireNet. (As of 6/8/2016, images are missing from the candobetter.net republication, so, at least, until this fixed, we recommend that you read the original Voltaire Net version.)

[2] http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/terrorism.html See also re the attack on the USS Liberty in 1967:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRZSzdQuOqM. http://www.globalresearch.ca/israels-history-of-chemical-weapons-use/5352003

[3] In 2015 Saudi Arabia was the world's biggest importer of weapons and the top recipient of American-made arms from 2011-2015, followed closely by the United Arab Emirates, according to research compiled by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), which has been analyzing international arms transfers since 1968. See http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/24/politics/us-arms-sales-worldwide/

[4] The Syrian President, as Gaddafi did until recently, presides over a secular state. He does not want a caliphate. But the United States and Israel are promoting all the extreme groups and leaders in the Middle East who do want a caliphate to restore something akin to the Ottoman Empire, which relied on slavery for its administration and succession. Iran, although a Muslim state, presents a bulwark against Wahabism (Saudi Arabia's religion, which condones mass slavery). Iran did not have the same tradition of mass slavery as the rest of the Ottoman Empire. Farazmand, Ali (1998) “Persian/Iranian Administrative Tradition”, in Jay M. Shafritz (Editor), International Encyclopedia of Public Policy and Administration. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, pp 1640–1645 – Excerpt: "Persians never practiced mass slavery, and in many cases the situations and lives of semi-slaves (prisoners of war) were in fact better than the common citizens of Persia." (pg 1642). Cited in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Iran#cite_note-1 This article describes the aims of a caliphate. http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261264/its-not-isis-we-need-beat-its-caliphate-daniel-greenfield

[5] See, "Does Bashar al-Assad really have to go?