Should Julian Assange Face Prison?editor
Given the summary of the case of Julian Assange in the video, it seems that he is one of the “good guys” – so, should President Trump pardon him? Or should he be locked up?
Click here to view the above bombshell video, exposing the truth... read more
David Galloway, a surgeon and Former President of Royal College of... read more
One online commentator remarked, perhaps a tad sarcastically on seeing the... read more
Commentator at the YouTube Platform... Scotland will be full of people itching... read more
From The Catholic World Report (CWR)... Father Frank Pavone, a well-known pro-life... read more
Comment: The anti-Trump news commentators here in the UK are in their... read more
From the YouTube Platform, comment written 6 days ago... My Dad who... read more
Editor writes... An Irish reader alerted me to the above video, as... read more
From the BBC... Two SNP leadership candidates are demanding information from the... read more
From Demanding an Apology | Psychology Today... There are some people who... read more
I have to confess that I don’t know anything much about Assange so I Googled and this was the first link to come up – it makes him seem a really odd person, all in all. I don’t know what to make of him.
All I had in mind before reading that, was that he was someone who felt obligated to release government papers, for public information. I had the impression that he was exposing government corruption, but now I honestly don’t know what to make of him. I’ll hold off making up my mind about whether he should be in jail or freed until I check out what other bloggers think. Maybe that’s me passing the buck, LOL!
I would recommend you not use Google for a search engine, or or anything else for that matter. They are a key part of the tech arm of the Deep State.
I had intended to act on your recommendation to download DuckDuckGo last time the Google issue arose, but didn’t get round to it, so on seeing your response to Fidelis/Josephine (!) I decided to get it organised right away with a vew to coming on here to boast.
After doing my best to follow the steps provided, I found myself opening “the very latest version of Firefox” to a hearty welcome! Goodness only knows what I’ve done, but I will try again, asap.
Ha ha – I sometimes use other engines but mostly Google. I will think over your advice, though, even though it was really meant for Fidelis, LOL!
Josephine & Fidelis,
Sorry about my misplaced advice – I’m easily confused!
I am inclined to agree with RCA Victor (despite his confusion over your identity – he thinks you’re Josephine, but, thankfully, my eagle eye spotted his mistake just in time, I hope, to save you suffering a serious identity crisis!) in that, the website you linked is a tad suspect.
I paid a flying visit to that site just now and I didn’t recognise the Julian Assange I’ve read about previously – far from it.
So, I suggest you stick with your original sense of injustice on his behalf. I have a feeling he’s not “guilty as charged”.
If it was the Deep State that Julian Assange was exposing, then more power to him,. I remember a story that was circulating a couple of years ago about Hillary Clinton, who actually asked out loud at an Obama Cabinet meeting:
“Can’t we just drone this guy?”
There is also a link between Assange and the murder of Democrat Party operative Seth Rich in 2016, who leaked information to Assange about how Clinton was cheating Bernie Sanders out of the nomination.
RIch’s murder, btw, has been covered up every which way but Sunday.
That makes two, count ’em, connections with Clinton, at least .If Assange is a bad guy, then my name is King Edward…
King Edward, oops, RCA Victor 😀
That is all extremely interesting stuff.
Yes, I’m quite certain that Assange was revealing “Deep State” (and “Deep Church”) material, no question about it.
Your revelations really do confirm that, if further confirmation were required.
That is a really interesting report but there seems to be doubt as to whether the murdered man actually was Assange’s source. It is all very murky, anyway.
I don’t know what to think about Assange – I was sympathetic to him before I read Athanasius’s comment below, now I’m not sure what to think of him.
If I remember correctly, Assange all but came out and said explicitly that Seth Rich had been sending him DNC emails. But it’s been a couple of years since I read that, and my memory, as Editor would say, seems to be fading fast. In fact, my memory seems to be fading fast…
Your memory is correct, Assange did say that Seth Rich supplied the DNC emails, which he said got Rich murdered. According to the Muller probe into Russian meddling, however, Assange received those emails days or weeks after Seth Rich’s death, the suggestion being that he was using a dead Seth Rich to deflect away from the real source, which Muller suggested was Russia. Very complicated and deceptive stuff.
I would trust Muller’s claims as much as I trust Santa’s claim that he only brings presents to well behaved little boys and girls. Yeah right! Remember, I was one of those “well behaved” children once – and I do mean “once” 😀
I had exactly the same thought when I read of the Muller report, but the fact that both President Trump and Mike Pompeo greatly support the Assange extradition request suggests that there’s maybe a bit more to his sources than we know.
I think extraditing him would be an appalling injustice. What crime is he guilty of?
think this sums it up best :
That’s an honest assessment from Peter Hitchens, despite his admission of disliking Assange personally.
I found myself agreeing with him about refusing to send Assange to the US – after all, the US categorically refused to send the woman back to the UK for questioning over the death of the young man in England, killed as a result of her car being driven on the wrong side of the road, and colliding, fatally as it turned out, with the young man’s motorcycle.
Now that it’s obvious, though, that we do not have a truly free and fair press anyway, I’m not sure that argument will hold water.
Unless it can be demonstrated that he has committed a crime, the case against him – which appears to be purely political – ought to be dropped.
I digress but about 10 years ago , Sweden issued a EU Arrest Warrant against JA for alleged sex offences ; in reality it was an attempt at political arrest, to get him incarcerated then extradite him; but he escaped to Ecuadorian Embassy). The EU Arrest Warrant is an abomination which should have everyone in Britain up in arms, yet it is totally swept under the carpet. British police and politicians love it because allegedly it enables them to “cooperate effectively” with EU states over crime. Actually it cuts out due process, and is a tool for tyranny, removing our English Common Law right not to be arbitrarily arrested and incarcerated long term. (I live in England and not sure about Scots law? ). I am certain that whatever the outcome re Brexit, even WTO exit, Boris Johnson will sign a Security Treaty stitching us into the developing EU totalitarian criminal “justice” system presided over by a (currently Romanian) Public Prosecutor. On receipt of a EU Arrest Warrant English authorities must unquestioning hand a suspect over, with no right to demand prima- facie evidence of a crime.
I have taken it for granted that the EU Arrest Warrants would no longer be applicable in the UK after Brexit. I sincerely hope that is the case; I’ve always regarded the system of EU Arrest Warrants as outrageous and sinister.
Editor. You may find this of interest.
I don’t know anything about Assange or what he is alleged to have done. However, I do know that the state does not have unlimited power and that morally corrupt people rise to high places of authority. Someone needs to stop them. Assange could be a hero, he could be a criminal. I don’t think we will ever find out the truth. The sex offence allegation is something that could easily have been invented by the American government.
The sex allegations came from the Swedish Government, not the USA.
Looking at the two reports, the one posted by Fidelis and the other by Mary, I think it’s easy to make the mistake of failing to make the distinction between the man, his personality and personal behaviour, with his work in exposing the “Deep State” and the “Deep Church” – there is a difference. It’s much the same as what Trump’s enemies are doing; not seeing the difference between his personality and flaws, and the good he has done for the country.
As Peter Hitchens says, it’s possible to dislike Assange – detest him, in fact – and still see that he has committed no crime in his journalistic expose and that it is an attack on freedom of speech and journalistic integrity, to criminalise him in this way.
You read my mind – is he a hero or a criminal? I just don’t know for sure. I do agree that someone has to expose the criminality going on in governments.
I had always superficially supported Julian Assange, believing that he was being hounded by the deep state for releasing information exposing their nefarious actions to the detriment of humanity. Two leaks in particular were, I believe, in the public interest in thsi regard – “Climategate” and the email server scandal involving Hilary Clinton. However, having done a more in-depth study into Assange and his WikiLeaks operation, I’ve reached the conclusion that he is an individual whose sources and intentions are dubious and potentially dangerous.
I do not believe for one second that he perpetrated sexual assaults on anyone, this was simply the method used to secure his arrest with the intention of extraditing him to the U.S. to face espionage charges. When reading the very lengthy list of national security information he obtained and released into the public domain, some of it extremely sensitive, it seems fair to conclude that he put himself on the firing line. When you start mixing it with national intelligence agencies, revealing their secrets to the public, it stands to reason that they will take you down one way or another.
It’s interesting to note here that Assange had a very unstable childhood. His mother was twice married and divorced. It seems he and his step-brother moved around with their mother like nomads, living in no less than 30 different towns and cities across Australia. That instability throughout his childhood is what got him off lightly when, at age 16, he was charged together with others for hacking into the servers of corporate and other companies. It is interesting here to note that a hacking group he was allegedly involved with at that time had “subversive” in its title. I always get worried when people call their actions “subversive”. Anyway, on a more positive note, he was instrumental in helping Australian police to technically track and arrest some purveyors of online child pornography, a collaboration that surely stands to his eternal credit.
As a person Assange is something of an enigma. He seems to be quite libertarian in his views, Left Wing even. He’s anti-nuclear and he dislikes President Trump almost as much as he dislikes Hilary Clinton. There is also an association with the Russia Today broadcaster (RT), an organisation that no true patriot should ever get involved with given that it’s funded by the Russian government. This together with the sheer volume of secretive documents his WikiLeaks organisation had access to, documents relating to many different governments and private corportations, make me suspect that his sources were not just random individuals with the good of the world at heart. There was just too much information on too many sensitive subjects, which makes me think that perhaps a central source of significance was part of his supply chain.
I don’t know the ins and outs of it all but I can say that intellegence agenices in every country would have viewed this man as a loose cannon whose actions they may well have considered to be subversive.
Let’s face it, we live in a world in which all governments have their security services, their spies and their dirty secrets, this is nothing new, sad as it is. That being the reality, I would say that Julian Assange acted wrongly, either by hacking into computer servers personally or receiving hacked information. There is nothing Christian in such action as this, especially if it undermines a country’s national security to give advantage to hostile foreign players. Sorry to say that despite perhaps a misguided notion that he was doing some good, Assange’s operation cannot be justified as in any way moral. Nor, incidentally, can it be argued that freedom of the press gave him licence to publish sensitive national security data. Press freedom is greatly misunderstood in our time, it should never extend to publishing top secret information illegally obtained.
Having said all of this, I don’t think Assange should be extradited to the U.S. on the grounds that the U.S. do not extradite wanted individuals to the UK. Extradition is a two-way street, not a one-way on-demand service available only to the Pentagon. If Assange has genuine charges to answer in relation to national security, charges that can be backed with solid and indisputable evidence, then his case should be heard in a British court in the presence of a jury of his peers.
You’ve made me rethink my position about Julian Assange. I can see the points you make, although I do feel there is a need for someone exposing the scandalous things which governments get involved in.
You said “he is an individual whose sources and intentions are dubious and potentially dangerous.”
I am wondering if it really matters what his intentions are, if he is revealing crucial information that governments want to keep hidden? He might be full of hate against individuals and glad to expose them, but does that really matter if what he is getting out into the public domain is helpful to us and our freedom? I wouldn’t mind a “subversive” in the government right now TBH, spilling the beans about the real motivation behind the decision to lockdown again. Maybe I’m wrong, but I really do believe we need people like Assange, taking the risks involved to make sure we are aware of what is going on behind the scenes. The only thing is I am not so sure it is moral, and I can imagine you would probably be right about that.
Josephine and Laura
While I agree that certain information released into the public domain has been helpful to the general public, such as info relating to the climate change scam, a lot of what he put out was of no use to the ordinary citizen and therefore not morally licit. We have to remember as well that Assange was making a lot of money from his leaks, named “man of the year” by Time magazine and other publications, presented with all kinds of prestigious awards and being signed up to high profile magazine interviews for fees in excess of £1 million, so he wasn’t just driven by ideology.
I’m afraid from a Catholic point of view the stealing of sensitive information from governments and other sources, unless essential in times of war, is really not justifiable in moral terms. The so-called “whistleblower” title adopted to lend credence to such behaviour often ends more in innocent people being wrongly accused than perpetrators of evil being brought to justice. Think of the #Metoo movement, for example, and those secret “whistleblowers” in the American intelligence community, not to mention White House staffers, who release all kinds of lies about President Trump for use by the Communist media. I’m not that inclined to whistleblowers unless there really is something wicked going on that needs to stop.
Having said all this, it would indeed be great right now to have Assange’s leaks on this Covid-19 scam. I’ll bet they would be extremely revealing. Now that would be justified.
It sounds like Assange is simply “anti-Establishment” and doesn’t distinguish between Establishment sectors who are performing a necessary service, e.g. national security, and those who activities are quite nefarious.
Can you share some of his sources that you’ve researched?
I think you’re right, he’s just anti-Establishment, though he made a bit of money and fame along the way for a while. My sources, I’m afraid boils down to just one source, Wikipedia! I know it’s not the most reliable site in the world but the general gist on Assange seems to be straightforward enough, detailing dates and other sources. There are a number of linked sources at the end of the Wikipedia article but I didn’t check them out as I already knew a little about his past from previous research, a long time ago.
I have read your post quite carefully but I’m not sure it would be immoral to be “subversive” in the way Assange has been. Him, and Edward Snowdon are whistle-blowers, and it’s often whistle-blowers that we need to waken us up to what the governments are doing that is subversive. I’m not sure of my ground on this, though, so it’s good to think more carefully about these things.
Contact me by email – I could use a subversive on the team 😀
PS firstly, though, get yourself a job in the Vatican or, at least, in your local diocesan office 😀
I hear this post from you is to be serialised in the Daily Mail, so I’ll wait until it’s published and read it there 😀
Seriously, I have read through it quickly but I am still looking up the dictionary for words like “enigma”, extradited and “purveyors” so, for now, let me say only this…
You have to laugh… (I hope!)
You shouldn’t have troubled yourself looking up the meaning of all those interesting words. I’ve already looked them up and could have told you what they mean.
Love the cartoon, would advise all men henceforth to ensure that only plastic knives are kept in their kitchen’s. But then, I suppose there will always be metal pots!
I’ve already mentioned the Seth Rich murder case as being an important aspect of the Assange case. Here is a good summary of the Seth Rich murder cover-up:
Free Assange. It is the only way to move forward in truth and light
Comments are closed.