nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

High nuclear crimes don’t pay

    by beyondnuclearinternational, By Linda Pentz Gunter

Politicians and executives snared for their roles in bribery and racketeering schemes

Breaking: On June 29, former Ohio Speaker of the House, Republican, Larry Householder, was handed down the maximum sentence of 20 years in prison for his role in the high crimes described below. His co-conspirator, Matt Borges, the former Ohio GOP Chairman, was sentenced on June 30 to fiveyears in federal prison.

This is part one of a two-part story on bribery and corruption in the nuclear power realm and the questionable ethics of legal lobbying. The original article was published in its entirety in Capitol Hill Citizen, a print-only newspaper published by Ralph Nader. These articles are reproduced with kind permission of the editor. Part two will be published in the next few weeks. Capitol Hill Citizen comes out in print only. To subscribe or purchase single copies, click here.

It all began when Ohio nuclear power plant owner, FirstEnergy, began “bleeding cash” in a desperate effort to keep its aging and uneconomical Davis-Besse and Perry nuclear power plants solvent. 

The effort bankrupted FirstEnergy subsidiary, FirstEnergy Solutions, then owner of the two nuclear plants. The shareholders wanted out. FirstEnergy threatened to close the plants. But Ohio House Republican, Larry Householder, had other plans. 

Householder concocted a nefarious scheme to extract $61 million from the failing company to ensure his re-election and that of enough political allies to guarantee his return to the House Speakership. 

This, in turn, would secure enough votes to ensure passage of a $1.3 billion bailout bill, known as HB6, that would rescue the two nuclear plants along with struggling coal plants. 

And it worked. For a while.

Householder, who had previously held the Ohio House Speakership from 2001-2004, was duly re-elected to that position in January 2019. Millions of dollars also poured into the campaign war chests of 21 political candidates in order to stack the House with votes in favor of the bailout bill. It duly passed the House on May 29, 2019 and the Senate on July 17, 2019. But the July 23, 2019 Ohio House concurrence vote passed the bill by only one vote. And then it all unraveled.

On July 21, 2020, Householder and four others were arrested for what investigating US Attorney for the Southern District of Ohio, David DeVillers, described as “the biggest criminal racketeering conspiracy in Ohio history.” 

Householder, who was re-elected to the Ohio House shortly afterwards and refused to resign, was unanimously voted out as Speaker on July 30, 2020. Eleven months later the House voted 75-21 to expel Householder. 

After a seven week trial, Householder and fellow conspirator, former GOP Chairman Matt Borges, were found guilty of racketeering conspiracy on March 9, 2023. The jury took just nine hours to reach their verdict. Householder was sentenced on June 29 to 20 years in prison — the maximum penalty. Borges was sentenced on June 30 to five years in federal prison. Both men said they would appeal.

The U.S. District judge in the case, Timothy Black, scolded Householder at sentencing, saying: “Beyond financial greed, I think you just liked power. You weren’t serving the people. You were serving yourself.”

Assistant U.S. Attorney Emily Glatfelter described Householder as “the quintessential mob boss, directing the criminal enterprise from the shadows and using his casket carriers to execute the scheme”, in a sentencing memorandum to the judge.

FirstEnergy Corp. was also charged with conspiring to commit honest services wire fraud, but the company signed a deferred prosecution agreement that could see the charges dismissed. FirstEnergy also agreed to pay a $230 million monetary penalty. 

But an ongoing civil lawsuit against FirstEnergy alleging insider trading and other offenses has brought documents to light released by Ohio Consumers’ Council that reveal the true depth and scope of involvement of its executives in the scheme to ensure passage of HB6.

Nevertheless, Householder defense attorney, Steve Bradley, argued during the trial that Householder was just “being a good politician” and is simply “good at fundraising”. Never mind that Householder hid the source of the $61 million by funneling it through a murky 501(c)(4) called Generation Now, then redirected around $500,000 of it to pay off his personal credit card debt, settle a lawsuit, and repair a Florida home.

The flow of dark money to Generation Now, which FirstEnergy has now admitted supplying, also paid for a disinformation campaign to suppress a public petition drive to repeal HB6, launched by a coalition called Ohioans Against Corporate Bailouts. ……………………………………………………..

It remains to be seen whether the fate of those politicians and corporate executives who fell prey to greed and deception and to whom punishment will now be meted out, will serve as an adequate deterrent against further such conduct.

Linda Pentz Gunter is the international specialist at Beyond Nuclear and writes for and curates Beyond Nuclear International.   https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2023/07/02/high-nuclear-crimes-dont-pay/

July 5, 2023 Posted by | Legal, secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA | Leave a comment

Cover up? Did atom bosses collude to ‘manage message’ of Japanese plan to poison Pacific?

Cover up? Did atom bosses collude to ‘manage message’ of Japanese plan to poison Pacific?

Disturbing documentary evidence has been seen by the UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities which appears to suggest collusion between the Japanese nuclear industry, government ministries and the UN International Atomic Energy Authority to ‘manage the message’ over the ocean dumping of 1.3 million tonnes of radioactive water held over from the Fukushima nuclear disaster.

The purported IAEA-letterheaded document titled ‘IAEA REVISION PROPOSAL FOR THE FINAL REPORT OF HANDLING ALPS TREATED WATER AT TEPCO’S FUKUSHIMA DAIICHI NUCLEAR POWER STATION’ may not sound very exciting, but, if genuine, amounts to a clear admission that the international agency has been keen to collaborate at the highest level with the Japanese nuclear industry and ministry officials to downplay the dangers associated with discharging millions of barrels of water which remain contaminated with highly toxic tritium.

The document, seemingly issued by the Department of Nuclear Safety at the IAEA, was posted to the website/blogsite dunrenard[i] by an anonymous whistle-blower on 28 June 2023 and then forwarded to renowned marine radiation expert and campaigner Tim Deere-Jones, who brought it to the NFLA’s attention. In response to the release of the document, Japanese Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi has condemned it as a ‘forgery’. This document can be found at the end of this media release.

Operated by the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), the Fukushima Plant was hit by an earthquake and a tsunami on 11 March 2011.  A disaster unfolded with three nuclear meltdowns, three hydrogen explosions and a release of radiation from three reactors, and Government authorities were forced to evacuate 154,000 people from the surrounding area over a 20-mile radius.

Since the disaster, seawater water used to cool the destroyed reactors, along with rain- and groundwater that has leached into the damaged plant, has accumulated on site with over 1.3 million tons now being stored in barrels. Last year, the Japanese government confirmed its intention to build an underwater pipe 1km out to sea to discharge the radioactive water there, and now this work has been completed the dumping is scheduled to begin imminently, despite massive domestic and international opposition.

Opponents are fearful that although the contaminated water is treated by a process known as ALPS (the Advanced Liquid Processing System) this cannot remove deadly tritium, a beta-emitting radioactive isotope of hydrogen, and other radioactive materials, which if ingested can trigger cancers and appeals to stop this process citing the health risks and environmental damage that will result have been expressed by the local fishing and farming community, civic leaders, the Pacific Islands Council, regional governments, and anti-nuclear activists everywhere.

The NFLA has itself objected in letters to Japanese Ministers, TEPCO officials and the United Nations on two occasions and recently signed a partnership agreement with its Japanese equivalent, Mayors for a Nuclear Power Free Japan, in part to collaborate in opposing the plan.

In the released document, the IAEA supports the discharge of the radioactive water ‘even though the activity concentrations of some radionuclides above the [permitted] discharge limits are reported’ and agrees not to conduct a full radioactive analysisof every batch of the waterheld‘due to the concerns of [operator] TEPCO and relevant authorities [the Japanese Government]’.

More worryingly, the report clearly advises that ‘data and results that could be viewed negatively by the public should be removed from the final report’ and thatIAEA Director General Raphael Grossi has instructed that ‘positive conclusions supporting ALPS treated water discharging shall be included in the executive summary of the Final Report’.

The NFLA’s source was Mr Tim Deere-Jones, a graduate in Marine Studies from Cardiff University. Tim, an independent marine pollution researcher and consultant since 1983, is highly regarded by the many international organisations who have engaged him in their campaigns against the damage caused to our oceans and inland waterways by radioactive and other contaminants. Amongst his recent notable achievements, Mr Deere-Jones provided an invaluable professional advice to the successful Greenlandic campaign to ban the mining of Uranium and Rare Earths at Kuannersuit, which led to his report being translated into Kalaallisut, the official Inuit based language of Greenland.

Here Tim gives his analysis of the alleged IAEA document:

‘Documentary evidence of deep collusion between the IAEA, Japanese Government Ministries and TEPCO intended to suppress, “fudge” and spin evidence related to the scientific data related to the treatment, monitoring and sea-discharge of ALPS treated water from the Fukushima Daiichi disaster site.

Preliminary analysis:

Language of origin of the document is uncertain, the extent English language copy appears to have been either translated from the original or compiled by someone with English as a second language.

The document reports that the original draft “Notional Plan for Source and Environmental Monitoring associated with IAEA LPS Safety Review” was presented to the Japanese government in March 2023, and that the original Notional Plan proposed that environmental monitoring of the ALPS treated water should be based on “rapid analysis” of all batches of treated water and “full analysis” of selected batches of treated water.

While it appears to be clear that the proposed “rapid analysis” would not have been as thorough or detailed as the proposed “full analysis”, in the event the Document has confirmed that the Final Report has recommended the “rapid analysis” but that the “full analysis” of selected batches will not be recommended in the Final Report “due to the concerns of TEPCO and relevant authorities” (presumably the ministries of the Government of Japan).

The document confirms that, in May 2023, the IAEAs Director and Co-ordinator of Nuclear Safety & Security Department and the head of the IAEAs task force on the Fukushima releases, shared the IAEAs Draft Report on the releases with the GoJ (Government of Japan) and TEPCO officials.

The IAEA document notes that it’s Draft Report on the handling of ALPS treated water concludes with the finding in favour of the proposed discharge of the treated water to sea “even though the activity concentrations of some radionuclides above the discharge limits are reported”

The document comments on “The public’s captiousness on radioactivity issues”. (“Captiousness” is defined in dictionaries as “the disposition to find and point out trivial issues or faults”)

In the context of the above the document recommends that “data and results that could be viewed negatively by the public should be removed from the final report ……. Issued in later June.”

The document reports that, following negotiations with the GoJ, IAEA Director General Grossi, instructed that “positive conclusions supporting ALPS treated water discharging shall be included in the executive summary of the Final Report”

And that “the Final Report will highlight that TEPCO’s discharge plan is in accord with international safety standards to address public concerns and doubts. The IAEA will conduct discussions with all task force experts, but their recommendations will not be reflected in the Report”

The document confirms that the IAEA has agreed to make revisions to the Report on the basis of feedback from the Japanese Ministries of Economy/Trade and Industry, Foreign Affairs, Environment and TEPCO because TEPCO and the Ministries had “expressed concerns regarding the potential public opposition to some data and results. The IAEA fully understands these concerns and would make revisions”

The document reports that the GoJ “requested to fudge” responses to the Pacific Island Forum’s demand for a full analysis of ALPS treated water, and questions raised by neighbouring countries about Organically Bound Tritium (OBT). In that context the document reports that, presumably in response to the request, “the concerns were not included in the ALPS safety review”

My submissions on behalf of the Pacific Islands Forum

Despite the evidence reported above, the document confirms that the GoJ “recommended to stress the fact that Japanese Authorities never interfered with IAEAs safety review” and that “the independence of the Report is guarantee as no political elements involved”’

Commenting on the shocking revelations, Mr Deere-Jones said: 

“Since the original Fukushima disaster, I have made multiple submissions to, and on behalf of, the Pacific Islands Forum, Japanese Citizens Groups, Environmental NGOs, and Commercial Fishermen’s Associations. My submissions have repeatedly called for full analysis of the ALPS treated water and the sludges at the bottom of the ALPS treated water holding tanks, and referenced the peer reviewed scientific evidence demonstrating that marine Organically Bound Tritium posed a greater health risk through multiple dose delivery pathways than was recognised by the nuclear establishment (Japanese Govt ministries and agencies, TEPCO and the IAEA)”.

In response to the release of this alleged document, Japanese Foreign Minister Hayashi was quick to condemn it as a forgery and to refute any suggestion of Japanese government collusion, issuing the following statement to Associated Press:

“The IAEA is aware of the existence of the forged documents. The IAEA’s comprehensive final report is a document prepared under the responsibility of the IAEA, and the Japanese government is not in a position to manipulate its contents. “I would like to stress that we are firmly opposed to any attempt to undermine the independence and neutrality of the IAEA with false information.”[ii]

Tim Deere-Jones retorted: “Such a response is exactly what we would expect from the IAEA when such information is leaked to the public.  To suggest that the document is fraudulent is clearly intended to imply that concerned scientists, campaigners, marine stakeholders, and communities are implicated.

“However, the matters disclosed in the leaked document are very much in accord with the experience of scientists and campaigners who have been raising these concerns since the Fukushima disaster and its subsequent botched response first occurred.

“Since that time, we have submitted numerous fully scientifically referenced documents highlighting the issue of Organically Bound Tritium, the multiple other radionuclides not removed from the ALPS treated water, the failure to discuss the radioactive solids that have settled on the bottom of the holding tanks, the behaviour and fate of these multiple radioactive materials once discharged to sea and their impact on marine ecologies and the health of coastal communities.

“The submission of such information has been consistently met by the IAEA and nuclear industry with hostility, contempt, dismissal, and a refusal to engage with the issues raised.

“The leaked document is on IAEA headed paper and typeface, bears the imprint of the relevant department, is couched in language characteristic of the IAEA, and refers to the ‘The public’s captiousness on radioactivity issues’; captiousness being defined in dictionaries as “the disposition to find and point out trivial issues or faults”. Such language is a precise reflection of our long-term experience and understanding of the IAEA and nuclear industry attitude and response to our concerns.

“I would remind readers that the IAEAs Founding Statutes state that its principal objective is as follows ‘The Agency shall seek to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy’.”

In conclusion, NFLA Chairman, Councillor Lawrence O’Neill said:

“The contents of this report, if true, are deeply disturbing and suggest a plan in which, at the highest level, officials from the international agency responsible for nuclear safety, the Japanese nuclear industry and the Japanese government have colluded to underplay the dangers posed to Pacific marine life and the world community by the expedient, but irresponsible, discharge of tritium-contaminated water.

“Most bitterly disappointing is that this document suggests that such a plan has the tacit endorsement of IAEA Director-General Grossi; for Mr Grossi is the man in which the world community has placed its faith to put safety before political considerations to prevent a nuclear disaster at the imperilled Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine.”

Ends://…

July 4, 2023 Posted by | 2 WORLD, secrets,lies and civil liberties | Leave a comment

Chris Hedges: They Lied About Afghanistan. They Lied About Iraq. And They Are Lying About Ukraine.

The U.S. public has been conned, once again, into pouring billions into another endless war.

The playbook the pimps of war use to lure us into one military fiasco after another, including Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and now Ukraine, does not change. Freedom and democracy are threatened. Evil must be vanquished. Human rights must be protected. The fate of Europe and NATO, along with a “rules based international order” is at stake. Victory is assured.

The results are also the same. The justifications and narratives are exposed as lies. The cheery prognosis is false. Those on whose behalf we are supposedly fighting are as venal as those we are fighting against. 

The Russian invasion of Ukraine was a war crime, although one that was provoked by NATO expansion and by the United States backing of the 2014 “Maidan” coup which ousted the democratically elected Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych. Yanukovych wanted economic integration with the European Union, but not at the expense of economic and political ties with Russia. The war will only be solved through negotiations that allow ethnic Russians in Ukraine to have autonomy and Moscow’s protection, as well as Ukrainian neutrality, which means the country cannot join NATO. The longer these negotiations are delayed the more Ukrainians will suffer and die. Their cities and infrastructure will continue to be pounded into rubble.

But this proxy war in Ukraine is designed to serve U.S. interests. It enriches the weapons manufacturers, weakens the Russian military and isolates Russia from Europe. What happens to Ukraine is irrelevant. 

“First, equipping our friends on the front lines to defend themselves is a far cheaper way — in both dollars and American lives — to degrade Russia’s ability to threaten the United States,” admitted Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell.

“Second, Ukraine’s effective defense of its territory is teaching us lessons about how to improve the defenses of partners who are threatened by China. It is no surprise that senior officials from Taiwan are so supportive of efforts to help Ukraine defeat Russia. Third, most of the money that’s been appropriated for Ukraine security assistance doesn’t actually go to Ukraine. It gets invested in American defense manufacturing. It funds new weapons and munitions for the U.S. armed forces to replace the older material we have provided to Ukraine. Let me be clear: this assistance means more jobs for American workers and newer weapons for American servicemembers.”

Once the truth about these endless wars seeps into public consciousness, the media, which slavishly promotes these conflicts, drastically reduces coverage. The military debacles, as in Iraq and Afghanistan, continue largely out of view. By the time the U.S. concedes defeat, most barely remember that these wars are being fought. 

The pimps of war who orchestrate these military fiascos migrate from administration to administration. Between posts they are ensconced in think tanks — Project for the New American Century, American Enterprise Institute, Foreign Policy Initiative, Institute for the Study of War, The Atlantic Council and The Brookings Institution — funded by corporations and the war industry. Once the Ukraine war comes to its inevitable conclusion, these Dr. Strangeloves will seek to ignite a war with China. The U.S. Navy and military are already menacing and encircling China. God help us if we don’t stop them.

…………………………………………………………………………………… And what of the Ukrainian democracy we are fighting to protect? Why did the Ukrainian parliament revoke the official use of minority languages, including Russian, three days after the 2014 coup? How do we rationalize the eight years of warfare against ethnic Russians in the Donbass region before the Russian invasion in Feb. 2022? How do we explain the killing of over 14,200 people and the 1.5 million people who were displaced, before Russia’s invasion took place last year?

How do we defend the decision by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to ban eleven opposition parties, including The Opposition Platform for Life, which had 10 percent of the seats in the Supreme Council, Ukraine’s unicameral parliament, along with the Shariy Party, Nashi, Opposition Bloc, Left Opposition, Union of Left Forces, State, Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine, Socialist Party of Ukraine, Socialists Party and Volodymyr Saldo Bloc? How can we accept the banning of these opposition parties — many of which are on the left — while Zelenskyy allows fascists from the Svoboda and Right Sector parties, as well as the Banderite Azov Battalion and other extremist militias, to flourish? 

How do we deal with the anti-Russian purges and arrests of supposed “fifth columnists”  sweeping through Ukraine, given that 30 percent of Ukraine’s inhabitants are Russian speakers? How do we respond to the neo-Nazi groups supported by Zelenskyy’s government that harass and attack the LGBT community, the Roma population, anti-fascist protests and threaten city council members, media outlets, artists and foreign students? How can we countenance the decision by the U.S and its Western allies to block negotiations with Russia to end the war, despite Kyiv and Moscow apparently being on the verge of negotiating a peace treaty? 

I reported from Eastern and Central Europe in 1989 during the breakup of the Soviet Union.  NATO, we assumed, had become obsolete. President Mikhail Gorbachev proposed security and economic agreements with Washington and Europe. Secretary of State James Baker in Ronald Reagan’s administration, along with the West German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher, assured Gorbachev that NATO would not be extended beyond the borders of a unified Germany. We naively thought the end of the Cold War meant that Russia, Europe and the U.S., would no longer have to divert massive resources to their militaries. 

The so-called “peace dividend,” however, was a chimera……………………

It was universally understood in Eastern and Central Europe following the collapse of the Soviet Union that NATO expansion was unnecessary and a dangerous provocation. It made no geopolitical sense. But it made commercial sense. War is a business.

In a classified diplomatic cable — obtained and released by WikiLeaks — dated Feb. 1, 2008, written from Moscow, and addressed to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, NATO-European Union Cooperative, National Security Council, Russia Moscow Political Collective, Secretary of Defense, and Secretary of State, there was an unequivocal understanding that expanding NATO risked conflict with Russia, especially over Ukraine………………………………………………………..

The Russian invasion of Ukraine would not have happened if the western alliance had honored its promises not to expand NATO beyond Germany’s borders and Ukraine had remained neutral. The pimps of war knew the potential consequences of NATO expansion. War, however, is their single minded vocation, even if it leads to a nuclear holocaust with Russia or China. 

The war industry, not Putin, is our most dangerous enemy.    https://scheerpost.com/2023/07/02/chris-hedges-they-lied-about-afghanistan-they-lied-about-iraq-and-they-are-lying-about-ukraine/

July 3, 2023 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, Ukraine, weapons and war | 2 Comments

Biden Would Need His Pound of Flesh From Assange

The case of David Hicks, an Australian imprisoned by the United States in Guantanamo Bay is relevant. Hicks ultimately was released by the U.S., after pressure from the Australian government, when he agreed to a so-called Alford Plea, in which he pled guilty to a single charge, but was allowed to assert his innocence at the same time. on the grounds that he understood he would not receive a fair trial.

The U.S. president would not likely move on the case without some face-saving measure to ward off pressure from the C.I.A. and his own party, writes Joe Lauria.

By Joe Lauria / Consortium News 23 June 23  https://scheerpost.com/2023/06/23/biden-would-need-his-pound-of-flesh-from-assange/

The coming days or weeks could be the most pivotal in imprisoned WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange’s four-year legal drama. There are five possible scenarios:

  • Assange may have his appeal against extradition heard by the High Court;
  • He may have his appeal rejected and be put on a plane to the United States;
  • That plane may be stopped by an injunction from the European Court of Human Rights;
  • A last-minute plea deal may be worked out guaranteeing Assange’s eventual freedom or, least likely
  • the U.S. may abruptly drop its charges against him.  

Following the decision by High Court Judge Sir Jonathan Swift this month to reject Assange’s application to appeal his ordered extradition to the United States to stand trial on espionage charges, Assange’s legal team filed a new application to the High Court last week.  The decision on this application could come any day.

If it is refused, Assange will have run out of legal options in Britain, and could only be saved by the intervention of the European court. There is also still a chance of a plea deal in which President Joe Biden would need to exact punishment of Assange to cover his political posterior.  

Given new revelations in the UC Global case in Spain about C.I.A. spying on Assange there’s even an outside chance the Biden administration may drop the case to avoid exposure in the media circus that would ensue in Alexandria, VA if Assange is extradited to stand trial there.

Rollercoaster

Assange and his supporters have been on a rollercoaster since the beginning of May. 

Expectations grew in Australia last month that a deal may be in the works to liberate him. The hopes began with the clearest statements yet on the case from Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. On May 4, he said for the first time that he had spoken directly to U.S. authorities about Assange; that he wanted the prosecution to end and that he was concerned for his health.

Optimism grew further when five days later, Caroline Kennedy, the U.S. ambassador to Australia and daughter of slain President John F. Kennedy, agreed to meet a group of six, pro-Assange, Australian MPs, from three different parties, plus an independent.

It is highly unlikely that Kennedy would have invited them to the U.S. embassy for lunch to discuss Assange’s case without approval from at least the State Department, if not the White House.

A few days after that, Albanese said Assange would have to play his part in any deal to be freed. That was widely interpreted to mean that Assange would have to agree to some sort of plea deal, in which he agreed to plead guilty to a lesser charge, perhaps serve a short sentence in Australia and then walk free.

All this was leading up to President Joe Biden’s scheduled May 24 visit to Australia to meet with Albanese. Speculation ran wild that a deal to release Assange might be announced.

A rally in Sydney’s Hyde Park was planned for the day of Biden’s visit. One of his London lawyers, Jennifer Robinson, and Julian Assange’s wife, Stella Assange, made plans to be in Australia, her first ever trip to her husband’s native country.

Biden canceled his trip to Sydney, he said because of the then debt crisis, and met instead with Albanese in a bilateral meeting in Japan on the sidelines of the G7 Summit. There is no indication Assange was discussed.

Stella Assange went to Australia anyway with Robinson and both addressed the National Press Club in Canberra on May 22.  Stella Assange called this period the “end-game, the closet  my husband has been to release.” 

Robinson said for the first time on behalf of Assange’s legal team that they would consider a plea deal. 

Robinson said:

“We are considering all options. The difficulty is our primary position is, of course that the case ought to be dropped. We say no crime has been committed and the facts of the case don’t disclose a crime. So what is it that Julian would be pleading to?”

Two days later, Stella Assange and Assange’s brother and father whipped up a huge crowd of Assange supporters at the Hyde Park rally.

The Alford Plea

It is hard to imagine Assange admitting to having done anything wrong, when the case against him, as argued in his extradition hearing, appears to prove no wrongdoing at all.

The case of David Hicks, an Australian imprisoned by the United States in Guantanamo Bay is relevant. Hicks ultimately was released by the U.S., after pressure from the Australian government, when he agreed to a so-called Alford Plea, in which he pled guilty to a single charge, but was allowed to assert his innocence at the same time on the grounds that he understood he would not receive a fair trial.

Can an Alford Plea be a face-saving solution for both Biden and Assange? Can Assange’s team frame it as Assange denying participation in any crime while at the same time having to plead guilty to at least a lesser charge?

FBI Continues Probe

Some of this optimism was punctured on May 31 when The Sydney Morning Herald reported that the F.B.I. was still carrying out its investigation of Assange, three years after issuing its last superseding indictment.

The Herald reported that the F.B.I. in May sought an interview in London with Andrew O’Hagan, who worked as a ghostwriter on Assange’s autobiography in 2011. The London Metropolitan Police’s counterterrorism command sent the letter to O’Hagan, which said: “The FBI would like to discuss your experiences with Assange/WikiLeaks …”  

O’Hagan told the Herald: “I would not give a witness statement against a fellow journalist being pursued for telling the truth. I would happily go to jail before agreeing in any way to support the American security establishment in this cynical effort.”  

What could this mean in the context of speculation about negotiations over a plea deal?  Did the F.B.I. want to bolster its case to make it easier for Assange to accept a plea on the lesser charge of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion?  Or was it just trying to strengthen a very weak case against him?

Assange’s Australian lawyer, Stephen Kenny, told the Herald:

“I would think it is of some concern because we have been working to try to secure an arrangement that would see Julian come home. It would be very unusual if the FBI was trying to gather evidence that could help clear his name.”

Judge Rejects Application to Appeal

The rollercoaster plunged further with the news that a single judge on the High Court of England and Wales rejected Assange’s 11-month old request to cross appeal the lower court ruling in his case as well as the home secretary’s decision to extradite him.

Judge Swift, who has manifest conflicts of interest, rejected the 150-page application for  appeal of the home secretary’s decision to extradite Assange to the U.S. as well as a cross appeal of the lower court judge who initially released Assange on health grounds and conditions of U.S. prisons but who agreed with the U.S. on everything else.   

Swift took just three pages to dismiss the 150-page application to appeal, complaining about the length of the submission in the process.  He called Assange’s appeal “new evidence,” which he rejected, while the same court accepted the new evidence of U.S. assurances not to mistreat Assange to overturn the lower court’ decision to release him on health grounds.

Assange’s legal team has one last chance with the court. On Tuesday last week they submitted a 20-page document to the High Court  arguing why it should listen to the appeal against extradition. His team will get no more than a humiliating 15 minutes of a 30-minute hearing to argue before two judges on the High Court, according to former British diplomat Craig Murray. 

If this application is refused there are no more legal steps for Assange in Britain and he could be theoretically put on a plane to the U.S. that day.  

At that point, only an injunction from the European Court of Human Rights can stop the plane from taking off until that court examines the case. Assange’s lawyers filed a submission to the ECHR in December.  

But there is also the possibility of a last-minute plea agreement or the U.S. dropping the case.

What Biden Needs

This flurry of bad news for Assange, after weeks of encouraging developments, has buried talk of a plea agreement.  But a last minute deal cannot be ruled out.

Biden would need his pound of flesh from Assange if he would allow his administration to offer a plea. Assange would most likely have to plead guilty to something and serve more time, likely in Australia, before Biden would entertain ending the case.

Though he was never charged for the Democratic National Committee or the C.I.A. leaks, Assange is the continuing target of their ire, and would be unlikely to look kindly on Biden letting him go, especially a year before a U.S. presidential election. Biden knows he’s wrong on Assange, if he can remember it. He clearly stated his position on Assange on Meet the Press in December 2010.

Vice President Biden told the program that Assange could only be indicted if it could be proved he conspired to steal the published documents. That could not be proved and the Obama-Biden administration did not indict Assange. The Trump administration did. But only on the original 2010 espionage charges.

The U.S. indictment does not accuse Assange of stealing U.S. government documents, but only receiving them. If Biden stuck to his original principles he would have these charges dropped and let Assange go. But it’s political dynamite for him.

The C.I.A. and DNC would likely be furious with Biden so he will need something in return to show them for letting Assange go. Whether that satisfies them is another matter.  

Dropping the Case

The last, long-shot possibility, is that the U.S. drops the case altogether. This is what Assange’s supporters, parliamentarians around the world, human rights and press freedom groups, journalists’ unions and even WikiLeaks‘ five corporate media partners have been calling for.  

But until now it’s been like talking to a marble wall in Washington. Yet, developments in the UC Global case in Spain and the upcoming U.S. presidential election might provide conditions for the U.S. to want to get out of its pursuit of Assange.

A recent development in the Madrid criminal trial against UC Global chief David Morales for violating Assange’s privacy by spying on him in Ecuador’s London embassy with 24/7 live surveillance for the Central Intelligence Agency as well on his privileged conversations with his lawyers has solidly confirmed the C.I.A’s role.

Would Langley want that exposed at Assange’s trial federal court in Alexandria, VA, where U.S. media interest would be intense?  

Also, would Biden welcome during a presidential campaign the protests in the plaza before the Alexandria courthouse, highlighting his administrations efforts to convict a journalist for publishing accurate information exposing U.S. state crimes, handing his political opponents a cudgel to expose his hypocrisy about defending press freedoms?  

It might indeed be in Biden’s and the C.I.A.’s interests to wash their hands of this filthy endeavor once and for all. (There is precedence for this in the Katharine Gun case.)

In one way or the other, the coming weeks appear to be leading to a climax in the extradition phase of arguably the most important press freedom case in U.S. history. 

June 24, 2023 Posted by | legal, secrets,lies and civil liberties | 6 Comments

Zelensky bans Russian books

The Ukrainian president has signed a controversial bill outlawing the import of Russian and Belarusian publications

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky announced on Thursday that he had signed a law making it illegal to import and distribute Russian and Belarusian language products in Ukraine. However, some Ukrainian officials have pointed out that the step could hinder Kiev’s plans to join the EU. 

The move comes after Ukrainian citizens registered an online petition on the official presidential website asking for the ban, back in May. The petition reached the 25,000-vote threshold required for it to be formally considered by the head of state. 

The author of the petition noted that the Ukrainian parliament had already approved the law on June 19, 2022, but that Zelensky had never signed the bill. As a result, Russian books continued to be sold in Ukraine, which undermines “the information security of the state and the economic foundations of Ukrainian book publishing,” according to the petition.  

“I consider the law to be correct,” Zelensky stated in a Telegram post announcing that he had finally signed the legislation. 

He noted, however, that the text of the legislation had been sent to EU institutions for an “additional assessment” of whether it could breach Kiev’s obligations to protect minority rights, particularly linguistic ones, in the context of Ukraine’s application for EU membership. 

In a written response to the petition last month, Zelensky explained that there had been a “number of reservations” that prevented the law from being adopted. 

The president stated that Ukraine’s Ministry of Justice had proposed applying the right of veto to the bill, arguing that completely banning the import and distribution of Russian publications would contradict several articles of Ukraine’s constitution. 

Additionally, Zelensky said that despite agreeing with the nature of the law, the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry had also advised vetoing the bill. The ministry had warned that its current version “does not meet the norms and standards of the EU in the field of human rights, including freedom of opinion, protection of the rights of national minorities, prohibition of discrimination on the basis of language, and therefore may complicate the process of negotiations on Ukraine’s accession to the European Union.”

June 24, 2023 Posted by | civil liberties, media, Ukraine | Leave a comment

The Imminent Extradition of Julian Assange and the Death of Journalism

Julian Assange’s legal options have nearly run out. He could be extradited to the U.S. this week. Should he be convicted in the U.S., any reporting on the inner workings of power will become a crime.

By Chris Hedges / Original to ScheerPost more https://scheerpost.com/2023/06/18/chris-hedges-the-imminent-extradition-of-julian-assange-and-the-death-of-journalism/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chris-hedges-the-imminent-extradition-of-julian-assange-and-the-death-of-journalism

High Court Judge Jonathan Swift — who previously worked for a variety of British government agencies as a barrister and said his favorite clients are “security and intelligence agencies” — rejected two applications by Julian Assange’s lawyers to appeal his extradition last week. The extradition order was signed last June by Home Secretary Priti Patel. Julian’s legal team have filed a final application for appeal, the last option available in the British courts. If accepted, the case could proceed to a public hearing in front of two new High Court judges. If rejected, Julian could be immediately extradited to the United States where he will stand trial for 18 counts of violating the Espionage Act, charges that could see him receive a 175-year sentence, as early as this week. 

The only chance to block an extradition, if the final appeal is rejected, as I expect it will be, would come from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The parliamentary arm of the Council of Europe, which created the ECtHR, along with their Commissioner for Human Rights, oppose Julian’s “detention, extradition and prosecution” because it represents “a dangerous precedent for journalists.” It is unclear if the British government would abide by the court’s decision — even though it is obligated to do so — if it ruled against extradition, or if the U.K. would extradite Julian before an appeal to the European court can be heard. Julian, once shipped to the U.S., would be put on trial in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia where most espionage cases have been won by the U.S. government. 

Judge Vanessa Baraitser at Westminster Magistrates’ Court refused to authorize the U.S. government’s extradition request in Jan. 2021 because of the severity of the conditions Julian would endure in the U.S. prison system. 

“Faced with the conditions of near total isolation without the protective factors which limited his risk at [Her Majesty’s Prison] Belmarsh, I am satisfied the procedures described by the U.S. will not prevent Mr. Assange from finding a way to commit suicide,” said Baraitser when handing down her 132-page ruling, “and for this reason I have decided extradition would be oppressive by reason of mental harm and I order his discharge.”

Baraitser’s decision was overturned after an appeal by U.S. authorities. The High Court accepted the conclusions of the lower court about increased risk of suicide and inhumane prison conditions. But it also accepted four assurances in U.S. Diplomatic Note no. 74, given to the court in Feb. 2021, which promised Julian would be well treated. The U.S. government claimed that its assurances “entirely answer the concerns which caused the judge [in the lower court] to discharge Mr. Assange.” The “assurances” state that Julian will not be subject to Special Administrative Measures (SAMs). 

They promise that Julian, an Australian citizen, can serve his sentence in Australia if the Australian government requests his extradition. They promise he will receive adequate clinical and psychological care. They promise that, pre-trial and post-trial, Julian will not be held in the Administrative Maximum Facility (ADX) in Florence, Colorado. No one is held pre-trial in ADX Florence. But it sounds reassuring. ADX Florence is not the only supermax prison in the U.S. Julian can be placed in one of our other Guantanamo-like facilities in a Communications Management Unit (CMU). CMUs are highly restrictive units that replicate the near total isolation imposed by SAMs.

None of these “assurances” are worth the paper they are written on. All come with escape clauses. None are legally binding. Should Julian do “something subsequent to the offering of these assurances that meets the tests for the imposition of SAMs or designation to ADX” he will, the court conceded, be subject to these harsher forms of control. 

If Australia does not request a transfer it “cannot be a cause for criticism of the USA, or a reason for regarding the assurances as inadequate to meet the judge’s concerns,” the ruling read. And even if that were not the case, it would take Julian 10 to 15 years to appeal his sentence up to the U.S. Supreme Court, which would be more than enough time to destroy him psychologically and physically. 

No doubt the plane waiting to take Julian to the U.S. will be well stocked with blindfolds, sedatives, shackles, enemas, diapers and jumpsuits used to facilitate “extraordinary renditions” conducted by the CIA.  

The extradition of Julian will be the next step in the slow-motion execution of the publisher and founder of WikiLeaks and one of the most important journalists of our generation. It will ensure that Julian spends the rest of his life in a U.S. prison. It will create legal precedents that will criminalize any investigation into the inner workings of power, even by citizens from another country. It will be a body blow to our anemic democracy, which is rapidly metamorphosing into corporate totalitarianism. 

I am as stunned by this full frontal assault on journalism as I am by the lack of public outrage, especially by the media. The very belated call from The New York Times, The Guardian, Le Monde, Der Spiegel and El País — all of whom published material provided by WikiLeaks — to drop the extradition charges is too little too late. All of the public protests I have attended in defense of Julian in the U.S. are sparsely attended. Our passivity makes us complicit in our own enslavement.

Julian’s case, from the start, has been a judicial farce.

Former Ecuadorian President Lenin Moreno terminated Julian’s rights of asylum as a political refugee, in violation of international law. He then authorized London Metropolitan Police to enter the Ecuadorian Embassy — diplomatically sanctioned sovereign territory — to arrest a naturalized citizen of Ecuador. Moreno’s government, which revoked Julian’s citizenship, was granted a large loan by the International Monetary Fund for its assistance. Donald Trump, by demanding Julian’s extradition under the Espionage Act, criminalized journalism, in much the same way Woodrow Wilson did when he shut down socialist publications such as The Masses.

The hearings, some of which I attended in London and others of which I sat through online, mocked basic legal protocols. They included the decision to ignore the CIA’s surveillance and recording of meetings between Julian and his attorneys during his time as a political refugee in the embassy, eviscerating attorney-client-privilege. This alone should have seen the case thrown out of court. They included validating the decision to charge Julian, although he is not a U.S. citizen, under the Espionage Act. They included Kafkaesque contortions to convince the courts that Julian is not a journalist. They ignored Article 4 of the U.K.-U.S. extradition treaty that prohibits extradition for political offenses. I watched as the prosecutor James Lewis, representing the U.S., gave legal directives to Judge Baraitser, who promptly adopted them as her legal decision. 

The judicial lynching of Julian has far more in common with the dark days of Lubyanka than the ideals of British jurisprudence.

The debate over arcane legal nuances distracts us from the fact that Julian has not committed a crime in Britain, other than an old charge of breaching bail conditions when he sought asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy. Normally this would entail a fine. He was instead sentenced to a year in Belmarsh prison and has been held there since April 2019. 

The decision to seek Julian’s extradition, contemplated by Barack Obama’s administration, was pursued by the Trump administration following WikiLeaks’ publication of the documents known as Vault 7, which exposed the CIA’s cyberwarfare programs designed to monitor and take control of cars, smart TVs, web browsers and the operating systems of most smart phones, as well as Microsoft Windows, MacOS and Linux. 

Julian, as I noted in a column filed from London last year, is targeted because of the Iraq War Logs, released in Oct. 2010, which document numerous U.S. war crimes, including images seen in the Collateral Murder video, of the gunning down of two Reuters journalists and 10 other civilians and severely injuring two children.

He is targeted because he made public the killing of nearly 700 civilians who had approached too closely to U.S. convoys and checkpoints, including pregnant women, the blind and deaf, and at least 30 children

He is targeted because he exposed more than 15,000 unreported deaths of Iraqi civilians and the torture and abuse of some 800 men and boys, aged between 14 to 89, at Guantánamo Bay detention camp. 

He is targeted because he showed us that Hillary Clinton in 2009 ordered U.S. diplomats to spy on U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and other U.N. representatives from China, France, Russia, and the U.K., spying that included obtaining DNA, iris scans, fingerprints, and personal passwords, all part of the long pattern of illegal surveillance that included eavesdropping on U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan in the weeks before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. 

He is targeted because he exposed that Obama, Hillary Clinton and the CIA backed the June 2009 military coup in Honduras that overthrew the democratically-elected president Manuel Zelaya, replacing him with a murderous and corrupt military regime. 

He is targeted because he released documents that revealed the United States secretly launched missile, bomb and drone attacks on Yemen, killing scores of civilians. 

He is targeted because he made public the off-the-record talks Hillary Clinton gave to Goldman Sachs, talks for which she was paid $657,000, a sum so large it can only be considered a bribe, as well as her private assurances to Wall Street that she would do their bidding while promising the public financial regulation and reform. 

For revealing these truths alone he is guilty.

The U.S. court system is even more draconian than the British court system. It can use SAMs, anti-terrorism laws and the Espionage Act to block Julian from speaking to the public, being released on bail, or seeing the “secret” evidence used to convict him. 

The CIA was created to carry out assassinations, coups, torture, kidnapping, blackmail, character assassination and illegal spying. It has targeted U.S. citizens, in violation of its charter. These activities were exposed in 1975 by the Church Committee hearings in the Senate and the Pike Committee hearings in the House. 

Working with UC Global, the Spanish security firm in the embassy, the CIA put Julian under 24-hour video and digital surveillance. It discussed kidnapping and assassinating him while he was in the embassy, which included plans of a shoot-out on the streets with involvement by London Metropolitan Police. The U.S. allocates a secret black budget of $52 billion a year to hide multiple types of clandestine projects carried out by the National Security Agency, the CIA, and other intelligence agencies, usually beyond the scrutiny of Congress. All these clandestine activities, especially after the attacks of 9/11, have massively expanded.

Senator Frank Church, after examining the heavily redacted CIA documents released to his committee, defined the CIA’s covert activity as “a semantic disguise for murder, coercion, blackmail, bribery, the spreading of lies.” 

The CIA and intelligence agencies, along with the military, all of which operate without effective Congressional oversight, are the engines behind Julian’s extradition. Julian inflicted, by exposing their crimes and lies, a grievous wound. They demand vengeance. The control these forces seek abroad is the control they seek at home. 

Julian may soon be imprisoned for life in the U.S. for journalism, but he won’t be the only one.

June 21, 2023 Posted by | Legal, media, secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA | 2 Comments

Israel Worries U.S. Weapons for Ukraine Are Ending Up in Iran’s Hands

NewsWeek, BY TOM O’CONNOR ON 6/15/23 

high-ranking Israel Defense Forces (IDF) commander has told Newsweek that Israel is concerned over the risks of weapons provided by the United States and other Western nations to Ukraine ending up in the hands of Israel’s foes in the Middle East, including Iran.

With experts too backing these worries, the situation could mark yet another chapter in a long legacy of U.S. arms shipments being diverted, empowering adversaries of both Israel and the U.S. in another restive region, while the focus of Western governments is on the volatile conflict playing out in Eastern Europe.

The Israeli commander, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the topic, said the diversion of weapons, such as the Javelin shoulder-fired anti-tank missile system, was being monitored from paramilitary forces operating on both sides of the Russia-Ukraine war………………………………………………………..

The U.S. has provided nearly $50 billion in military assistance to Ukraine since Russia launched its war in February 2022. Prior to the conflict, the U.S. sent up to 7,700 Javelins to Ukraine and, by two months into the war, had sent an additional 5,500.

More batches of these systems and other portable weapons such as Tube-Launched, Optically Tracked, Wireless-Guided (TOW) anti-tank missiles and Stinger anti-aircraft missiles have continued to come in new aid packages, such as one announced Wednesday, as part of a growing and increasingly advanced array of Western weapons made available to Ukraine………………………………….

The issue channels a long history of U.S. arms inadvertently ending up in the hands of adversarial forces.

This trend was demonstrated most clearly this century in the large quantities of U.S.-supplied weapons wielded by the Islamic State militant group (ISIS) as a result of the mass surrender of U.S.-partnered forces in the face of the jihadis’ lightning advances in Iraq and the defeat and absorption of U.S.-backed rebel groups by ISIS in neighboring Syria………………………………… more https://www.newsweek.com/israel-worries-us-weapons-ukraine-are-ending-irans-hands-1806131

June 19, 2023 Posted by | Israel, secrets,lies and civil liberties | Leave a comment

Why Biden Wants Assange in Jail: Case at the Tipping Point

15 Jun 2023 A London High Court judge rejected Wikileaks editor Julian Assange’s appeal against his extradition to the United States. He now faces up to 175 years in prison — despite public opinion around the world and in his home country, Australia. The UN has declared his detention “arbitrary,” which usually results in the release of the detainee, but not so far. The fate of the man who revealed so many of the hidden crimes of the US empire hangs in the balance. Brian Becker is joined by Joe Lauria, editor in chief of Consortium News

June 17, 2023 Posted by | civil liberties, Legal, UK | Leave a comment

Democracy out the window in USA – as teachers and others punished for making pro-Russian comments

Tammy, 17 June 23

Three St. Louis residents indicted on charges of illegally pushing pro-Russian propaganda

https://www.krps.org/missouri-news/2023-04-19/three-st-louis-residents-indicted-on-charges-of-illegally-pushing-pro-russian-propaganda

First of all Russia is not a socialist country and being a socialist in the usa is not a crime. Bernie sanders is a democratic socialist. The biden administration, is behind these prosecutions.
https://news.yahoo.com/substitute-teacher-suspended-remarks-supporting-004938324.html

Substitute teacher suspended for remarks supporting Putin’s invasion of Ukraine

Other teachers in Florida, Utah, and Idaho have been suspended or fired for similar views.
Not democratic. Semi totalitarian.
People from across the usa, have complained about FBI interrogations about, their views on Russia and the Ukraine. Some taken from social media. This is totalitarian at many levels.

June 17, 2023 Posted by | civil liberties, USA | Leave a comment

CIA: Black Market of Arms Trade. Part 1

CIAGATE, MAY 26, 2023

We can see that the CIA controls a significant part of the arms trade black market. Millions of dollars are being spent on financing terrorist groups and political radicals around the globe. Biden has already allocated more than $50 billion for purchasing weapons for Ukraine.

We know that the vast part of this money ends up in the pockets of corrupt CIA agents and officials bribed by them, and are also spent on other illegal activities.

In the first part of our investigation, we publish a list of the CIA agents who are involved in corrupt schemes for weapons supply to hotspots all around the world. We want their activity to become public and be thoroughly investigated. The U.S. foreign policy should emphasize peace with all nations, entangling alliances with none.

List of persons involved in the weapons supplies to Ukraine.…………………………… more https://ciagate.substack.com/p/cia-black-market-of-arms-trade-part

June 15, 2023 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Stealth actions by SpaceX, as 36 space launches approved by California Coastal Commission without a vote, public hearing, or public notice

Nina Beety, 11 June 23

June 7, the California Coastal Commission approved 36 SpaceX launches at
Vandenberg AFB per year without a vote, public hearing, or public notice
in the agenda. SpaceX presently launches 6 rockets per year.

The proposal was hidden in a staff report which the Commission merely
concurred with. The public did not know it was proposed. Fortunately, a
commissioner commented on it during the meeting, and a member of the
public caught it and investigated. She and another person then spoke
during public comments the following day June 8 against this possibly
unlawful action, and hearing about it for the first time, I joined them.
If this attendee had not caught it, the action would not have come to
light.

Stealth actions are being repeated by agency after agency, exempting
projects from review, environmental evaluation, hearings, public notice,
and laws, and this must be exposed and contested very publicly whenever they
occur.

Below is the link to the agenda. Item #10 “Energy, Ocean Resources and
Federal Consistency” report.

Also,  U.S. Department of the Air Force propose a new space complex at
Vandenberg Air Force Base
for private company Phantom Space Company for up to 48 launches per year
and 48 rocket tests per year. This was scheduled on the June 7 agenda
but was postponed until probably the July meeting. The staff report for
it is linked in the June agenda.

10 Energy, Ocean Resources & Federal Consistency
https://www.coastal.ca.gov/meetings/agenda/#/2023/6
Report by the Deputy Director on permit waivers, emergency permits,
immaterial amendments & extensions, negative determinations, matters not
requiring public hearings, and status report on offshore oil & gas
exploration & development. For specific information contact the
Commission’s Energy, Ocean Resources, and Federal Consistency Division
office at (415) 904-5240.

June 12, 2023 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA | 1 Comment

Judge orders the Crown Prosecution Service to come clean about the destruction of key documents on Julian Assange

WIKILEAKS – After years of running up against a brick wall, the first crack has appeared with the latest ruling on our FOIA case issued by Judge O’Connor. In addition to the ruling, British Labour MP John McDonnell has just obtained new information from the Crown Prosecution Service. McDonnell is calling for an independent inquiry into the CPS’s role in the Assange case.

DI STEFANIA MAURIZI, 31 MAGGIO 2023,  https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/in-edicola/articoli/2023/06/01/judge-orders-the-crown-prosecution-service-to-come-clean-about-the-destruction-of-key-documents-on-julian-assange/7179642/

For the last six years, they have rejected all of our attempts to shed light on the destruction of key documents in the Julian Assange case, even though the emails were deleted when the high-profile, controversial case was still ongoing.

But now the British authorities at the Crown Prosecution Service have to come clean: they must declare whether they hold any information as to when, how and why that documentation was deleted, and if they do hold it, they must either release it to us or clarify the grounds for their refusal.

This order was just issued by the London First-tier Tribunal, chaired by Judge O’Connor, in response to our litigation based on the UK Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), in which we are represented by top-notch FOIA specialist Estelle Dehon, of Cornerstone Barristers in London.

READ THE RULING ISSUED BY JUDGE O’CONNOR

The Crown Prosecution Service must comply with this judicial order by June 23, and any failure on their part to do so could lead to contempt proceedings.

Ever since 2017, when we first discovered that documents had been destroyed, we have consistently run up against a brick wall: the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has always maintained that deletion of those documents was in conformity with their standard operating procedure. A previous ruling issued in 2017 by the London First-tier Tribunal – chaired by a different judge, Andrew Bartlett – averred that there was “nothing untoward” about their deletion, and the British body instituted to uphold information rights, the Information Commissioner (ICO), has always been pleased with the decision that there was “nothing untoward” about it.

This new ruling by judge O’Connor is the first crack in the brick wall.

Judge O’Connor has also confirmed that “WikiLeaks is a media organization”, though he rejected all of our requests to access the full correspondence between the Crown Prosecution Service and the U.S. State Department, the U.S. Department of Justice, the Swedish Prosecution Authority and the Ecuadorian authorities on the Julian Assange case from 2010 to 2019.

Relative to the correspondence between the CPS and Ecuador, the judge ruled in favour of the Crown Prosecution Service, maintaining an exemption to “neither confirm nor deny” that the British and the Ecuadorian authorities exchanged emails on the case.

As for the case of all other correspondence between the CPS and the Swedish authorities, between the CPS and the U.S. Department of Justice, and between the CPS and the U.S. State Department, Judge O’Connor ruled that if released, the documentation would risk damaging the relationship of trust and confidence that underlies information sharing between prosecuting authorities, and that it would be likely to have a chilling effect on the relationship with both the Swedish and US authorities, as well as with other foreign authorities.

The ruling was issued in two forms: a decision available to the public, and a separate closed decision which can be accessed only by the UK authorities at the Crown Prosecution Service and by ICO.

The documentation on which the closed ruling is based includes, among other documents, over 552 pages of correspondence between the CPS and the U.S. Department of Justice and between the CPS and the State Department between 2010 and 2019, including “the provision of legal advice and queries on wider strategic matters relating to Mr. Assange’s extradition to that country”.

This correspondence is part of the documentation which we have been requesting under FOIA for years, and which has always been denied to us. And yet accessing it would be crucial, as the British authorities are assisting the U.S. government in extraditing a journalist for revealing war crimes and torture, as if he was a mafia boss or drug dealer. From Amnesty International to the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), all major organizations for the defense of human rights and freedom of the press have called for the extradition case to be dropped and Assange freed.

Assange remains in prison, however, waiting for British justice to decide on his appeal against extradition to the United States, where he risks 175 years in prison for obtaining and publishing classified U.S. government files.

All requests to drop the charges and free Julian Assange have been ignored by the British and U.S. governments. And all decisions and opinions of highly respected UN bodies like the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD) or the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture from 2016 to 2022, Nils Melzer, have been completely ignored by the British government, if not ridiculed, as occurred with the UNWGAD decision.

Now that Judge O’Connor has rejected our request to access those documents, in particular the correspondence between the U.S. and the U.K., the oversight role that the Fourth Estate should play also risks being severely undermined. And yet we are not alone in our call for public scrutiny.

In addition to the authoritative report by Nils Melzer and our FOIA battle, recently a British Labour member of Parliament, John McDonnell, has also submitted a FOIA request to the CPS, full of detailed questions which were just answered by the Crown Prosecution Service.

Speaking to Il Fatto Quotidiano, John McDonnell told us: “It’s become clear that there must now be an independent inquiry into the role of the CPS in relation to the case of Julian Assange. We need full openness and transparency”.

The role of the Crown Prosecution Service in the Assange case

Continue reading →

June 12, 2023 Posted by | Legal, secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

ASSANGE JUDGE IS 40-YEAR ‘GOOD FRIEND’ OF MINISTER WHO ORCHESTRATED HIS ARREST

Julian Assange’s fate lies in the hands of an appeal judge who is a close friend of Sir Alan Duncan – the former foreign minister who called Assange a “miserable little worm” in parliament.

MATT KENNARD AND MARK CURTIS, 2 DECEMBER 2021, Declassified UK

Lord Chief Justice Ian Burnett, the judge that will soon decide Julian Assange’s fate, is a close personal friend of Sir Alan Duncan, who as foreign minister arranged Assange’s eviction from the Ecuadorian embassy. 

The two have known each other since their student days at Oxford in the 1970s, when Duncan called Burnett “the Judge”. Burnett and his wife attended Duncan’s birthday dinner at a members-only London club in 2017, when Burnett was a judge at the court of appeal.

Now the most powerful judge in England and Wales, Burnett will soon rule on Assange’s extradition case. The founder of WikiLeaks faces life imprisonment in the US. ……………………………….

Duncan served as foreign minister for Europe and the Americas from 2016-19. He was the key official in the UK government campaign to force Assange from the embassy. 

As minister, Duncan did not hide his opposition to Julian Assange, calling him a “miserable little worm” in parliament in March 2018. 

In his diaries, Duncan refers to the “supposed human rights of Julian Assange”. He admits to arranging a Daily Mail hit piece on Assange that was published the day after the journalist’s arrest in April 2019. 

Duncan watched UK police pulling the WikiLeaks publisher from the Ecuadorian embassy via a live-feed in the Operations Room at the top of the Foreign Office. 

He later admitted he was “trying to keep the smirk off [his] face”, and hosted drinks at his parliamentary office for the team involved in the eviction.

Duncan then flew to Ecuador to meet President Lenín Moreno in order to “say thank you” for handing over Assange. Duncan reported he gave Moreno “a beautiful porcelain plate from the Buckingham Palace gift shop.” 

“Job done,” he added.  https://declassifieduk.org/assange-judge-is-40-year-good-friend-of-minister-who-orchestrated-his-arrest/

June 11, 2023 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

Trump held secret nuclear documents |

June 11, 2023 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA | Leave a comment

Snowden Warns Today’s Surveillance Technology Makes 2013 Look Like ‘Child’s Play’

“We trusted the government not to screw us,” said Edward Snowden. “But they did. We trusted the tech companies not to take advantage of us. But they did. That is going to happen again, because that is the nature of power.”

by EDITOR, June 9, 2023  https://scheerpost.com/2023/06/09/snowden-warns-todays-surveillance-technology-makes-2013-look-like-childs-play/

By Julia Conley / Common Dreams

With this week marking 10 years since whistleblower Edward Snowden disclosed information to journalists about widespread government spying by United States and British agencies, the former National Security Agency contractor on Thursday joined other advocates in warning that the fight for privacy rights, while making several inroads in the past decade, has grown harder due to major changes in technology.

“If we think about what we saw in 2013 and the capabilities of governments today,” Snowden told The Guardian, “2013 seems like child’s play.”

Snowden said that the advent of commercially available surveillance products such as Ring cameras, Pegasus spyware, and facial recognition technology has posed new dangers.

As Common Dreams has reported, the home security company Ring has faced legal challenges due to security concerns and its products’ vulnerability to hacking, and has faced criticism from rights groups for partnering with more than 1,000 police departments—including some with histories of police violence—and leaving community members vulnerable to harassment or wrongful arrests.

Law enforcement agencies have also begun using facial recognition technology to identify crime suspects despite the fact that the softwareis known to frequently misidentify people of color—leading to the wrongful arrest and detention earlier this year of Randal Reid in Georgia, among other cases.

“Despite calls over the last few years for federal legislation to rein in Big Tech companies, we’ve seen nothing significant in limiting tech companies’ ability to collect data.”

Last month, journalists and civil society groups called for a global moratorium on the sale and transfer of spyware like Pegasus, which has been used to target dozens of journalists in at least 10 countries.

Protecting the public from surveillance “is an ongoing process,” Snowden told The Guardian on Thursday. “And we will have to be working at it for the rest of our lives and our children’s lives and beyond.”

In 2013, Snowden revealed that the U.S. government was broadly monitoring the communications of citizens, sparking a debate over surveillance as well as sustained privacy rights campaigns from groups like Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Fight for the Future.

“Technology has grown to be enormously influential,” Snowden told The Guardian on Thursday. “We trusted the government not to screw us. But they did. We trusted the tech companies not to take advantage of us. But they did. That is going to happen again, because that is the nature of power.”

Last month ahead of the anniversary of Snowden’s revelations, EFF notedthat some improvements to privacy rights have been made in the past decade, including:

  • The sunsetting of Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, which until 2020 allowed the U.S. government to conduct a dragnet surveillance program that collected billions of phone records;
  • The emergence of end-to-end encryption of internet communications, which Snowden noted was “a pipe dream in 2013”;
  • The end of the NSA’s bulk collection of internet metadata, including email addresses of senders and recipients; and
  • Rulings in countries including South Africa and Germany against bulk data collection.

The group noted that privacy advocates are still pushing Congress to end Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which permits the warrantless surveillance of Americans’ communications, and “to take privacy seriously,” particularly as tech companies expand spying capabilities.

“Despite calls over the last few years for federal legislation to rein in Big Tech companies, we’ve seen nothing significant in limiting tech companies’ ability to collect data… or regulate biometric surveillance, or close the backdoor that allows the government to buy personal information rather than get a warrant, much less create a new Church Committee to investigate the intelligence community’s overreaches,” wrote EFF senior policy analyst Matthew Guariglia, executive director Cindy Cohn, and assistant director Andrew Crocker. “It’s why so many cities and states have had to take it upon themselves to ban face recognition or predictive policing, or pass laws to protect consumer privacy and stop biometric data collection without consent.”

“It’s been 10 years since the Snowden revelations,” they added, “and Congress needs to wake up and finally pass some legislation that actually protects our privacy, from companies as well as from the NSA directly.”

June 10, 2023 Posted by | 2 WORLD, secrets,lies and civil liberties | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »