World press freedom endangered, if UK extradites Julian Assange to America
The
|
Assange Faces Extradition for Exposing US War Crimes, BY Marjorie Cohn, Truthout, October 11, 2020 Three weeks of testimony in Julian Assange’s extradition hearing in London underscored WikiLeaks’s extraordinary revelation of U.S. war crimes in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay. But the Trump administration is seeking to extradite Assange to the United States to stand trial for charges under the Espionage Act that could cause him to spend 175 years in prison. Assange founded WikiLeaks during the Bush administration’s “war on terror,” which was used as a pretext to start two illegal wars and carry out a widespread program of torture and abuse of prisoners at Guantánamo and the CIA black sites. On October 8, 2011, Assange told a Stop the War Coalition rally in London’s Trafalgar Square, “If wars can be started by lies, peace can be started by truth.” In 2010 and 2011, WikiLeaks published classified material that Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning had provided to the organization. Manning was prosecuted, convicted and sentenced to 35 years in prison for leaking the documents. As he left office, Barack Obama commuted her sentence to the seven years she had already served. That commutation provoked “tremendous anger” in the Trump administration and drew Trump’s attention to Assange, Eric Lewis testified. Lewis, chairman of the board of Reprieve U.S. and lawyer for Guantánamo and Afghan detainees, called this “a politically motivated prosecution.” The files that WikiLeaks published contained 90,000 reports about the war in Afghanistan, including the Afghan War Logs, which documented a greater number of civilian casualties by coalition forces than the U.S. military had reported. In addition, WikiLeaks published nearly 400,000 field reports about the Iraq War, more than 15,000 unreported deaths of Iraqi civilians, and the systematic murder, torture and rape by the Iraqi army and authorities that were ignored by U.S. forces. WikiLeaks also published the Guantánamo Files, 779 secret reports constituting evidence of the U.S. government’s abuse of approximately 800 men and boys, ages 14 to 89. That abuse violated the Geneva Conventions and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Perhaps the most notorious release by WikiLeaks was the 2007 “Collateral Murder” video, which depicts a U.S. Army Apache helicopter target and fire on unarmed civilians in Baghdad. At least 18 civilians were killed, including two Reuters reporters and a man who came to rescue the wounded. Two children were injured. A U.S. Army tank drove over one of the bodies, cutting it in half. The video contained evidence of three separate war crimes prohibited by the Geneva Conventions and the U.S. Army Field Manual. As they are firing on the civilians, U.S. gunmen can be heard saying, “Look at those dead bastards.” In his written testimony, investigative journalist Nicky Hager drew a parallel between the Collateral Murder video and the television image of George Floyd screaming “I can’t breathe.” Assange Cannot Be Extradited for a Political OffenseThe 2003 U.S.-U.K. Extradition Treaty forbids extradition for a political offense. Although the treaty doesn’t define “political offense,” it generally includes espionage, treason, sedition and crimes against state power. Trump is asking the U.K. to extradite Assange for exposing war crimes. This is a classic political offense. Assange is charged under the Espionage Act and espionage constitutes a political offense as well……….. Assange’s Prosecution Violates Freedom of PressWhile the Obama administration declined to file criminal charges against Assange for fear of setting a dangerous precedent, Team Trump demonstrated no such forbearance. By charging Assange under the Espionage Act, Trump is making him a poster boy for its full court press against the media, which he calls “the enemy of the people.” Assange’s prosecution would send an ominous message to all journalists: report the unvarnished truth at your peril. No media outlet or journalist has ever been prosecuted under the Espionage Act for publishing truthful information, which is protected First Amendment activity. Journalists are permitted to publish material that was illegally obtained by a third person and is a matter of public concern. The U.S. government has never prosecuted a journalist or newspaper for publishing classified information, an essential tool of journalism. Information-gathering, reporting and disclosure fit the classic definition of activity protected by the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press. There is no distinction between what WikiLeaks did and what The New York Times, Der Spiegel, Le Monde, El País and The Guardian did as well. They all published articles based on documents WikiLeaks released. This is the reason Obama administration — which prosecuted an enormous number of whistleblowers — considered, but refrained from, indicting Assange. ……… WikiLeaks Didn’t Endanger Informants and Saved LivesAlthough the U.S. government claims that Assange endangered informants named in the published documents, John Goetz, an investigative reporter who worked for Germany’s Der Spiegel, testified that Assange took pains to ensure that the names of U.S. informants in Iraq and Afghanistan were redacted to protect their identities. …….. Moreover, WikiLeaks’s revelations actually saved lives. After WikiLeaks published evidence of Iraqi torture centers the U.S. had established, the Iraqi government refused Obama’s request to extend immunity to U.S. soldiers who commit criminal and civil offenses there. As a result, Obama had to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq. WikiLeaks also revealed evidence of wrongdoing by other countries besides the United States. The organization uncovered Russian surveillance, published exposés of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, and some say WikiLeaks’s exposure of corruption in Tunisia and torture in Egypt helped catalyze the Arab Spring………… Assange’s Prosecution Will Chill JournalismOstensibly to get around allegations that it is prosecuting Assange for conducting journalism, the Trump administration is trying to paint him as a hacker by accusing him of conspiring with Manning to break into a government computer to steal government documents, in violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. But, as Patrick Eller, a digital forensic expert, testified, the attempted cracking of the password hash was not technologically possible in 2010, when the conversation between Assange and Manning occurred. Even if it were feasible, the purpose would not have been to conceal Manning’s identity and it would not have given Manning any increased access to government databases. The prosecution of Assange would set a disturbing example for journalists and media outlets that publish information critical of the government. Team Trump singled out Assange to deter journalists from publishing material that criticizes U.S. policy. If Assange is extradited to the United States and convicted of the charges against him, it would chill journalists from reporting the facts for fear they could be indicted under the Espionage Act………. When she set the November 16 date for the defense to submit closing arguments, Judge Vanessa Baraitser asked the defense how the U.S. presidential election would affect its case and declared that her decision on extradition would come after that election, stating, “That’s one of the factors going into my decision.” Kristinn Hrafnsson, editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks, said that the judge “acknowledged what has been clear since even before the first indictment against Julian Assange was unsealed — that this is a politically motivated prosecution.” Baraitser, who has granted extradition in 96 percent of the cases that have come before her, plans to issue her ruling on January 4. If she grants extradition, there will be several levels of appeals, including to the European Court of Human Rights. The stakes could not be higher. https://truthout.org/articles/assange-faces-extradition-for-exposing-us-war-crimes/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=614ce999-9844-4d61-a600-169db0c99052 |
Big doubts about the economics of small nuclear reactors for the UK
FT 11th Oct 2020, The big challenge facing small nuclear reactors. When Britain unveiled its
first commercial nuclear reactor back in 1956, Calder Hall in Cumbria had
the ability to generate 50 megawatts of electricity. Fast-forward four
decades to the last reactor the UK completed, at Sizewell in Suffolk. Still
functioning, it has a capacity of 1,200MW. Spot the theme? Yup, ever bigger
reactors.
Size has steadily increased because of simple nuclear economics.
Sizewell B may be able to generate 24 times as much power as a 50MW
reactor. But it doesn’t need 24 times the material inputs and staffing to
generate that extra power. Which all makes it seem faintly
counter-intuitive that Britain is considering downsizing and spending money
on a fleet of so-called small modular reactors.
The government is considering plans to put up to £2bn into developing the technology. A
number of companies, including Britain’s Rolls-Royce and GE Hitachi, are
pitching to sell their products. The aim is to fund prototypes with a view
to kick-starting a new SMR industry.
This would build perhaps dozens of
mini-reactors to [supposedly] help the UK meet its net zero emissions target while also
keeping the lights on, as well as exporting this technically advanced kit.
Large nuclear hasn’t exactly a spotless record when it comes to cost
containment. So why make it harder by forgoing those scale advantages?
Research by a team led by Tony Roulstone at Cambridge university looked at
the relative costs of building a “first of a series” SMR against a
comparable large reactor. It concluded that if you used the same project
techniques as for conventional plants, the SMR would cost (once the
interest costs incurred in construction were taken into account) roughly 70
per cent more per kilowatt (kW) to build than the larger one.
Squeezing that cost back down requires a wholly different approach to construction.
Instead of building everything in the open on a massive building site, as
with large reactors, it means making as much as possible in factories
before shipment to site. The same Cambridge team estimated that with ever
more prefabrication and standardisation of parts, you could ultimately
squeeze the cost down roughly to parity with the larger reactor.
A glance at the history of overruns and delays that plagued the Advanced Gas-cooled
Reactor project in the 1960s should suffice as a reminder. For SMRs to
avoid a similar miserable fate, the government must pick a single
commercial technology which can bring in sufficient private sector
investment and attract export orders. This cannot be some “made in
Britain” industrial exercise. If that’s what’s in prospect, then,
honestly, big is probably best.
https://www.ft.com/content/99307126-bb21-48e3-87aa-301749dec870
Conflict of interest – UK’s Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS)
Stop Hinkley Press Release 8th Oct 2020, EDF’s Hinkley C Nuclear Power Station will be wiping out fish stocks in
Severn Estuary for 60 years. The Stop Hinkley Campaign is accusing
EDFGenco, the French and Chinese owned Company building Hinkley Point C, of
trying to bully the UK Environment Agency into allowing them to destroy
environmentally precious fish stocks for the 60 year lifetime of the
nuclear power station.
A condition placed on EDFGenco by the Environment
Agency was that permission to build Hinkley C was dependent on Acoustic
Fish Deterrents (AFDs) being placed on the two massive cooling water intake
heads 3 kilometres offshore from the Nuclear site.
Now EDFGenco is trying
to renege on its commitment to install AFDs and is seeking a variation on
the planning conditions imposed. EDFGenco claims that the Centre for
Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS) the government’s
marine and freshwater science expert body – is happy for them to go ahead
without AFDs. The Wildfowl and Wetland Trust points out that “CEFAS’s
relationship as a paid contractor to EDFGenco and an agent of Government
raises unavoidable questions of conflict of interest”.
Conservative UK government is considering a carbon tax, in its commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
Times 9th Oct 2020, Rishi Sunak is examining proposals for a UK-wide carbon tax that couldraise billions of pounds while encouraging the drive towards net-zero emissions. The chancellor is seeking to replace existing EU carbon-reduction schemes with the new tax when the transition period finishes at the end of the year.
“The danger with relying solely on a carbon tax is that no one believes politicians will not scrap it when things get tough, so no one invests. A cap and trade scheme that guarantees an outcome, alongside regulation and innovation support, is much more likely to lead to cuts in emissions.”https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/sunak-plans-carbon-emissions-tax-to-help-rebuild-economy-jbl3gs993
Will the UK government sacrifice the beautiful Suffolk coast in its misguided, uneconomic, Sizewell nuclear power push?
East Anglian Daily Times 8th Oct 2020, As councils lose patience with EDF, will Suffolk businesses follow suit?Today East Suffolk lies at a crossroads – the future of the east of the county now seems certain to rest in the hands of London-based civil servants and ministers – and to be honest I don’t know which way they will jump when push comes to shove. The deadline has now passed for councils, businesses, and residents to have their say on whether a two new nuclear reactors should be built on the Suffolk coast at Eastbridge, north of the existing stations at Sizewell.
landscape. But I do worry that there are some in government who do not understand the value of this area to the country as a whole who will be prepared to look on Sizewell C as a shiny investment to try to kick-start the UK economy after the pandemic and in a world no longer governed by EU rules, will pour in government subsidies to make up for the loss of Chinese money.
https://www.eadt.co.uk/ea-life/last-chance-to-stop-sizewell-c-1-6871419?s=09
BBC 8th Oct 2020, Campaigners against a new nuclear power station say they are “resolute”
after their bid to protect woodland was thrown out by the High Court. EDF
Energy, which wants to build two new reactors next to Sizewell B in
Suffolk, was given approval in 2019 to fell Coronation Wood on the site.
Together Against Sizewell C (Tasc) sought a judicial review, claiming that
decision was unlawful.
Design not even finished! But UK govt to subsidise Small Nuclear Reactors (SMRs)
The plan is for 16 of them – at ? £2bn each?
FT 7th Oct 2020, Downing St considers £2bn support for mini nuclear reactors
Consortium wants to build up to 16 generators . Downing Street is supporting plans to spend up to £2bn of taxpayers’ money on a
new generation of mini nuclear reactors. Consortium wants to build up to 16 generators to help UK meet carbon emissions targets. The first SMR is expected to cost £2.2bn and be online by 2029.
Government and industry figures confirmed that a pledge of £1.5bn-£2bn is being discussed which could even see taxpayers acquire an equity stake in the programme.
However, discussions are still ongoing and any final decision will be subject to the Treasury’s current multiyear spending review, which is due later this year. The government could also commission the first mini power station, giving confidence to suppliers and investors. The consortium, which also includes the National Nuclear Laboratory, will seek additional funding of at least £2bn, including from private investors and the capital markets.
Support for SMR technology is expected to form part of Boris Johnson’s “10-point plan for a green industrial revolution” which he will set out later in the autumn. …….. Under the plans being considered by Number 10, the small
modular reactors would be manufactured on production lines in central plants and then transported to sites for assembly. Each mini power station would operate for up to 60 years, providing 440MW of electricity per year — enough to power a city the size of Leeds.
The government’s support “should deliver sufficient cash to get the consortium through building
factories and well on the way to construction of power stations prior to finding more money from other sources,” said one person with knowledge of the situation.
The consortium is expected to finalise the SMR design by April next year, when it hopes to launch the four-year licensing process.
During that time it hopes to begin recruiting employees for the business, and identifying the sites for powers stations and the factories to build the components and modules for the SMRs. The business department hasalready pledged £18m towards the consortium’s early-stage plans.
https://www.ft.com/content/d7016b80-e0c4-4444-a059-2daf32b9a4ab
Call to British govt to not allow restart of Hinkley Point B nuclear reactors, with cracks in their cores
![]()
Stop Hinkley 29th Sept 2020, EDF Energy has just announced that it intends to submit new safety cases to the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) to re-open Reactors 3 and 4 at Hinkley Point B. It currently expects reactor 4 to return to service on 26 February 2021 and reactor 3 on 12 March 2021.
The Stop Hinkley Campaign is calling for both reactors to remain closed. Stop Hinkley spokesperson Roy Pumfrey said: “Nuclear engineer, the late John Large said more than a decade ago that it was gambling with public safety to allow reactors with cracks in their core to keep operating. (3) Every minute these reactors operate that gamble become riskier.
We call upon the UK Government to intervene and request the ONR to re-consider their unwise decisions at Hunterston B and to refuse to accept EDF’s safety cases for Hinkley Point B. It is EDF in Paris, France which will benefit from the restart of these reactors, but it is those of us who live in Somerset and middle England who are being exposed to these involuntary risks”
UK govt to give EDF a blank cheque for building Sizewell C nuclear power plant.
Dave Toke’s Blog 29th Sept 2020, It is looking increasingly likely that the British Government is about to cave-in to EDF’s demand that the British energy consumers should pay what could be massive cost overruns for building Sizewell C nuclear power plant.http://realfeed-intariffs.blogspot.com/2020/09/is-treasury-about-to-cave-in-over-edfs.html
Plans for Bradwell B nuclear power station could collapse
Campaigners claim plans for Bradwell B nuclear power station could collapse, Clacton Gazette , By Alex Gidden Reporter 28 Sept 20, CAMPAIGNERS claim plans to build a nuclear power station off the coast of Essex could collapse before the end of the year.
Group chairman Prof Andy Blowers made the bold claim after seeing Japanese firm Hitachi pull out of plans to build its own nuclear power station in north Wales.
He says Hitachi’s decision underlines the “huge expense” associated with building nuclear power stations and believes the Bradwell B project will be binned because of the costs and scale of opposition.
Both Colchester and Maldon councils have rejected planning applications for the power station in the past month.
The applications were jointly submitted by the China General Nuclear Power Group, also known as CGN, and energy firm EDF.
A spokesman for the Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group said: “CGN is now fully aware of the mountain it has to climb to get anywhere near planning permission for its massive nuclear juggernaut, which will utterly destroy the environment and wellbeing of the Blackwater region.
“Widespread public protest and influential councils have produced a powerful coalition of outright opposition to the proposals.
Its progress will not be straightforward and will take years to complete.
“By the time it could start operating, it will be a white elephant, unnecessary, uneconomic and redundant……… https://www.clactonandfrintongazette.co.uk/news/north_essex_news/18749213.campaigners-claim-plans-bradwell-b-nuclear-power-station-collapse/
UK to return high-level nuclear waste to Germany
|
UK to return high-level nuclear waste to Germany https://www.energylivenews.com/2020/09/28/uk-to-return-high-level-nuclear-waste-to-germany/
28 Sept 20, Preparations are underway for the first of the three shipments in late 2020, The UK will be returning high-level nuclear waste in the form of vitrified residues to Germany over the coming years.The waste results from the reprocessing and recycling of spent nuclear fuel at the Sellafield site in West Cumbria, which had previously been used to produce electricity by utilities in Germany. Preparations are underway for the first shipment in late 2020 under the Vitrified Residue Returns programme, which is a key component of the UK’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) strategy to repatriate high-level waste from the UK. A total of three shipments will be made to storage facilities in Germany, with the returns involving Sellafield Ltd working with International Nuclear Services (INS), a subsidiary of the NDA. INS will transport the waste by sea on a specialised vessel to a German port, followed by rail to the final destinations. Daher Nuclear Technologies has been contracted to safely manage the overland transport in Germany. |
|
A Sellafield nuclear disaster would spread across Cumbria – new map shows
|
Sellafield nuclear disaster would spread across Cumbria – new map shows, The Mail, By Staff Reporter 27 Sept 20, THE majority of south Cumbria could be affected if there was a major nuclear incident at Sellafield, a new report has revealed…….
Part of the new strategy means Outline Planning Zone’s must be put in place. These are areas outside of the immediate vacinity which could be affected by a disaster. A report from Steve Healey, the chief fire officer for Cumbria, revealed the affected area covers a 50-kilometre circular zone from an epicentre at Sellafield. The area includes as far south as Walney, east as Bowness and north almost to the Scottish border. Cumbria County Council has accepted the report at a meeting of the cabinet, which was chaired by Cllr Stewart Young….. This new concept of an Outlying Planning Zone is new. The zone is determined by kilometres from the centre of the Sellafield site. It takes you way beyond the boundaries of Copeland, showing that other areas of Cumbria would also be affected by a serious incident. “It includes BAE and the docks at Barrow. So, the implications of an accident are so significant for the whole county. It is a responsibility that sits then with Cumbria County Council as well as Barrow, Copeland and Allerdale. This is an important piece of work.” The new regulations allow for a transitional period of 12 months and all changes required to have been made by this May. The authority was on track to meet the deadlines until resources were diverted to respond to Covid-19. A plan has been agreed with the Office for Nuclear Regulation allowing the council to prepare the plans before November 21 this year. The report said Sellafield’s OPZ was the largest in the United Kingdom and whilst only outline planning is required there is a substantial amount of work being undertaken to identify vulnerable premises and infrastructure in the zone. ……… https://www.nwemail.co.uk/news/18752191.sellafield-nuclear-disaster-spread-across-cumbria—new-map-shows/ |
|
French taxpayers don’t want to pay for Sizewell nuclear station, neither do British.
France’s EDF demands clarity on British nuclear power plans Times John Collingridge 27 Sept 20, French energy giant EDF is set for a showdown with the Treasury over state funding for nuclear power stations as Britain’s atomic future faces a make-or-break moment.Jean-Bernard Lévy, chairman and chief executive of Électricité de France, will speak to chancellor Rishi Sunak via video link on Wednesday to demand clarity over Britain’s plans for funding nuclear power.
The industry was left reeling this month when Japan’s Hitachi quit its Horizon project to build a £20bn plant on Anglesey.
That shock retreat, after years of prevarication by Westminster over state support for nuclear power and turmoil in the Japanese nuclear industry, left only EDF and China General Nuclear with plans for atomic power stations in the UK.
EDF and China are building the delayed and over-budget £22.5bn Hinkley Point C power station in Somerset, but Paris has balked at
the prospect of French taxpayers funding the next nuclear project in Britain.
Instead, EDF, which is 84% owned by the French state, wants British taxpayers to underwrite a new plant at Sizewell in Suffolk. A
proposed new financial structure, the regulated asset base, would levy a tax on UK household energy bills to help pay for the project.
Other options include the British government taking a stake — although that has worried the Treasury, which is anxious about adding to its debt mountain.
EDF declined to comment. With most of Britain’s ageing reactors due to close by the end of the decade, Sunak and Boris Johnson face the dilemma of whether to fund more big nuclear plants, or rely on wind, solar, gas, small reactors and imported power to keep the lights on.
The American government has warned Hitachi against selling the Anglesey site to China, and is understood to be considering bankrolling US companies to take it over. Westinghouse, which makes the AP1000 nuclear plant, and NuScale Power,
which is developing small, modular reactors, are both believed to be
exploring options for the site. South Korea’s Kepco is also understood to
be interested, as is EDF.
Former UK Energy Minister Sir Ed Davey says new Sizewell nuclear station is too expensive
Suffolk’s Sizewell C too expensive, says Sir Ed Davey, BBC, By Vikki Irwin & Chris Bond
28 Sept 20, Former energy secretary Sir Ed Davey has said building a new nuclear power station at Sizewell is “too expensive”.
Suffolk businesses oppose the building of Sizewell nuclear power station
More than 100 rural Suffolk businesses have written to the Government to
oppose the building of a twin reactor nuclear power station. The letter,
which was addressed to Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for
Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Alok Sharma amongst others, raised
concerns about the site.
It has attracted signatures from almost 150
individual businesses, farms and landowners in the area. In the letter they
describe the nuclear power station as a “threat” which had been hanging
over their heads for at least eight years. “This would be tolerable if
the Sizewell C project was for the ‘greater good’,” read the letter.
“But we have concluded that it is not necessary to meet the UK’s
commitment to net zero, and would be a slow, risky and expensive waste of
taxpayers’ money that removes opportunities to make use of alternative,
green, deliverable and cost-effective energy solutions. “Meanwhile, many
of our plans are on hold at a time when farming faces the biggest changes
to the policy framework governing our industry in over 50 years.” The
letter also raised concerns about the impact on farm production which
owners say could “render productive land commercially and logistically
unviable”.
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/sizewell-c-construction-opposed-by-suffolk-businesses-1-685656
Media avoids covering the Assange extradition – despite it being the media “trial of the century”
Julian Assange: Press Shows Little Interest in Media ‘Trial of Century’ https://fair.org/home/julian-assange-press-shows-little-interest-in-media-trial-of-century/, ALAN MACLEOD 25 Sept 20,
Labeled the media “trial of the century,” WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s extradition hearing is currently taking place in London—although you might not have heard if you’re relying solely on corporate media for news. If extradited, Assange faces 175 years in a Colorado supermax prison, often described as a “black site” on US soil.
The United States government is asking Britain to send the Australian publisher to the US to face charges under the 1917 Espionage Act. He is accused of aiding and encouraging Chelsea Manning to hack a US government computer in order to publish hundreds of thousands of documents detailing American war crimes, particularly in Afghanistan and Iraq. The extradition, widely viewed as politically motivated, has profound consequences for journalists worldwide, as the ruling could effectively criminalize the possession of leaked documents, which are an indispensable part of investigative reporting.
WikiLeaks has entered into partnership with five high-profile outlets around the world: the New York Times, Guardian (UK), Le Monde (France), Der Spiegel (Germany) and El País (Spain). Yet those publications have provided relatively little coverage of the hearing.
Since the hearing began on September 7, the Times, for instance, has published only two bland news articles (9/7/20, 9/16/20)—one of them purely about the technical difficulties in the courtroom—along with a short rehosted AP video (9/7/20). There have been no editorials and no commentary on what the case means for journalism. The Times also appears to be distancing itself from Assange, with neither article noting that it was one of WikiLeaks’ five major partners in leaking information that became known as the CableGate scandal.
The Guardian, whose headquarters are less than two miles from the Old Bailey courthouse where Assange’s hearing is being held, fared slightly better in terms of quantity, publishing eight articles since September 7.However, perhaps the most notable content came from columnist Hadley Freedman (9/9/20).
When asked in an advice article: “We live in a time of so much insecurity. But is there anything we can expect from this increasingly ominous-looking winter with any certainty?” she went on a bizarre tangential rant ridiculing the idea that Assange’s trial could possibly be “politicized,” also crassly brushing off the idea that his young children would never see their father again, and never answering anything like the question she was asked. Holding people to account “for a mess they could have avoided,” she notes, “is not ‘weaponizing’ anything — it is just asking them to do their jobs properly.” She also claimed that believing Assange’s trial was politicized was as ridiculous as thinking antisemitism claims were cynically weaponized against Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, which, she meant to suggest, was a preposterous idea. This was not an off-the-cuff remark transcribed and published, but a written piece that somehow made it past at least one editor.
Like the Times, the Guardian appeared to be hoping to let people forget the fact it built its worldwide brand off its partnership with WikiLeaks; it was only mentioned in a forthright op-ed by former Brazilian president Lula da Silva (9/21/20), an outlier piece.
The Guardian should be taking a particularly keen role in the affair, seeing that two of its journalists are alleged by WikiLeaks to have recklessly and knowingly disclosed the password to an encrypted file containing a quarter-million unredacted WikiLeaks documents, allowing anyone—including every security agency in the world—to see an unredacted iteration of the leak. In 2018, the Guardian also falsely reported that Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort had conducted a meeting with Assange and unnamed “Russians” at the Ecuadorian embassy (FAIR.org, 12/3/18). And, as former employee Jonathan Cook noted, the newspaper is continually being cited by the prosecution inside the courtroom.
There were only two articles in the English or French versions of Le Monde (9/7/20, 9/18/20) and only one in either of Der Spiegel’s English or German websites (9/7/20), although the German paper did at least acknowledge its own partnership with Assange. There was no coverage of the hearings in El País, in English or Spanish, though there was a piece (9/10/20) about the US government thwarting a Spanish investigation into the CIA spying on Assange at the Ecuadorian embassy in London—accompanied by a photo of a protester against his extradition.
The rest of corporate media showed as little interest in covering a defining moment in press freedom. There was nothing at all from CNN. CBS’s two articles (9/7/20, 9/22/20) were copied and pasted from news agencies AP and AFP, respectively. Meanwhile, the entire sum of MSNBC’s coverage amounted to one unclear sentence in a mini news roundup article (9/18/20).
Virtually every relevant human rights and press freedom organization is sounding the alarm about the incendiary precedent this case sets for the media. The Columbia Journalism Review (4/18/19), Human Rights Watch and the Electronic Frontier Foundation note that the government includes in its indictment regular journalistic procedures, such as protecting sources’ names and using encrypted files—meaning that this “hacking” charge could easily be extended to other journalists. Trevor Timm, founder of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, told the court this week that if the US prosecutes Assange, every journalist who has possessed a secret file can be criminalized. Thus, it essentially gives a carte blanche to those in power to prosecute whomever they want, whenever they want, even foreigners living halfway around the world.
The United Nations has condemned his persecution, with Amnesty International describing the case as a “full-scale assault on the right to freedom of expression.” Virtually every story of national significance includes secret or leaked material; they could all be in jeopardy under this new prosecutorial theory.
President Donald Trump has continually fanned the flames, demonizing the media as the “enemy of the people.” Already 26% of the country (including 43% of Republicans) believe the president should have the power to shut down outlets engaging in “bad behavior.” A successful Assange prosecution could be the legal spark for future anti-journalistic actions.
Yet the case has been met with indifference from the corporate press. Even as their house is burning down, media are insisting it is just the Northern Lights.
-
Archives
- April 2026 (288)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS





