REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Assange arrested

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 17:50
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1379
PAGE 1 of 2

Thursday, April 11, 2019 10:51 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


For what? The Swedish charges against him were dropped a long time ago. Assange will probably be extradited to the USA for being a journalist and publishing things that the USA deep state would rather he didn't.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-11/julian-assange-arre
sted-after-ecuador-drops-asylum-protection

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, April 11, 2019 11:18 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Per usual, Signym understood nothing, but couldn't help but have a misinformed opinion:

The single charge, conspiracy to commit computer intrusion, was filed in March 2018, and stems from what prosecutors said was Assange's agreement to break a password to a classified United States government computer. It carries a penalty of up to five years in prison and is significant in that it is not an espionage charge, a detail that will come as a relief to press freedom advocates.
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/754-assange-indictment/d093e7d
c7982f7fe4c24/optimized/full.pdf


In a sovereign decision Ecuador withdrew the asylum status to Julian Assange after his repeated violations to international conventions and daily-life protocols. "The discourteous and aggressive behavior of Mr. Julian Assange, the hostile and threatening declarations of his allied organization, against Ecuador, and especially the transgression of international treaties" meant the situation is "unsustainable and no longer viable," Moreno said in a video message posted Thursday on Twitter. https://twitter.com/Lenin/status/1116271659512684544

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, April 11, 2019 11:20 AM

REAVERFAN

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, April 11, 2019 11:24 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Quote:

Originally posted by reaverfan:
What was that about a sealed indictment, again?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/us/politics/julian-assange-indictme
nt-wikileaks.html

Maybe it is a secret second indictment in addition to this one: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/754-assange-indictment/d093e7d
c7982f7fe4c24/optimized/full.pdf


The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, April 11, 2019 12:59 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Considering how badly #Russiagate is going (do they know something ahead of time about the Mueller report that we don't know, like perhaps it's a big fat dud?), and how badly #Brexit is going - well, they needed some distracting happy news for the war mongers.

You know those goalposts that were so important? QUICK!! LOOK OVER THERE INSTEAD!!

And shazaam! Two country's PR nightmares --- solved! At the same time!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, April 11, 2019 1:23 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
Considering how badly #Russiagate is going (do they know something ahead of time about the Mueller report that we don't know, like perhaps it's a big fat dud?), and how badly #Brexit is going - well, they needed some distracting happy news for the war mongers.

You know those goalposts that were so important? QUICK!! LOOK OVER THERE INSTEAD!!

And shazaam! Two country's PR nightmares --- solved! At the same time!

The Federal Court system handles thousands of cases simultaneously. Assange and Trump would be two. There is capacity to handle two more cases. And there is plenty of time for a second Brexit referendum. It was "astonishing" that 27 European countries could agree a "lot more readily" than UK politicians. If the UK politicians can't get their act together and get to an agreement the only other option is to go back to the people and have a second referendum to see whether people still feel the same way now that they did almost three years ago and resolve it that way.
www.bbc.com/news/business-47891982

Two Russian hackers are suspected of meddling in the attempt to destabilize the government and their information will be delivered to the Office of the Attorney General of Ecuador, Romi said. Julian Assange's asylum was revoked because there was sufficient evidence that he was meddling in Ecuador's internal affairs in an effort to destabilize the government. During former President Correa's government and while Patiño was chancellor, "they tolerated things like Assange putting feces on the embassy walls and other behaviors far from the minimum respect that a guest can have," said Romo.
www.cnn.com/uk/live-news/julian-assange-arrest-dle-gbr-intl/h_44c547fc
819d7e94b7bfc02bb91949c9


The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, April 11, 2019 5:34 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


Democrats love stomping out whistle blowers.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, April 11, 2019 10:34 PM

REAVERFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Democrats love stomping out whistle blowers.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

This is Trump's DOJ. Democrats aren't doing this.

Obama chose to not go after him.

Trump: I love Wikileaks.

Also Trump: I know nohing about Wikileaks.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, April 11, 2019 10:43 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


But when Obama waged war on whistle-blowers it was ok?


Let me hear you raise just one objection to Obama's heinous actions. Just one.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-speech/employee-speech-and-whistleblowe
rs/leak-prosecutions-obama-takes-it-11-or-should-we


https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/jan/10/jake-tapp
er/cnns-tapper-obama-has-used-espionage-act-more-all
-/

https://washingtonsblog.com/2015/05/obama-has-sentenced-whistleblowers
-to-31-times-the-jail-time-of-all-prior-u-s-presidents-combined.html


https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/06/obamas-whistleblowers-stu
xnet-leaks-drones
/

https://www.mediaite.com/online/traitors-or-heroes-all-of-the-whistleb
lowers-whove-been-prosecuted-by-obama-administration
/

https://www.longislandpress.com/2017/01/14/obamas-legacy-historic-war-
on-whistleblowers
/



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, April 11, 2019 10:45 PM

REAVERFAN


Nice try. Trump is our president, not Obama. Please keep up, kiki.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 12, 2019 1:19 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


But when OBAMA does the same with say Manning or Snowden, it's all OK!!!

Right?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 12, 2019 2:08 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


The Deep State is at it again eh Siggy/Rue!?

Ah, the irony. False arrest of a "fake" journalist or is that "fake" news of
a false arrest. Or is it.....?

Trump must be ever at the ready...Twitter Thumbs do your thing!



Could you speak up please!!!

Last I heard, "spying" is a Big Deal!


SGG


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
For what? The Swedish charges against him were dropped a long time ago. Assange will probably be extradited to the USA for being a journalist and publishing things that the USA deep state would rather he didn't.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-11/julian-assange-arre
sted-after-ecuador-drops-asylum-protection


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 12, 2019 2:14 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Whistleblowers suck, unless they're Democrats.

3, 2, 1.....


SGG


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Democrats love stomping out whistle blowers.

Do Right, Be Right. :)


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 12, 2019 2:24 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


It's only Thursday, it's getting late, and here you are - drunk-posting - again. Crap man, you got to cut that out.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 12, 2019 2:49 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Motherfucker! Why don't you guys take out a dollar and buy a clue. You post the same tired old bullshit posts about drunkenness. Hmmm, seems to me you guys know way too much about it.

Well, I'm not wasting any more time on this pathetic attempt.

Bye!


SGG


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
It's only Thursday, it's getting late, and here you are - drunk-posting - again. Crap man, you got to cut that out.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 12, 2019 7:42 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


Quote:

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Democrats love stomping out whistle blowers.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

This is Trump's DOJ. Democrats aren't doing this.

Obama chose to not go after him.

Trump: I love Wikileaks.

Also Trump: I know nohing about Wikileaks.



This isn't Trump. This isn't the American government. This is the UK government.

That being said, I'm going to be pretty pissed off if Trump doesn't make a stand against this.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 12, 2019 9:21 AM

REAVERFAN


Read what I wrote. Sound out the words.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 12, 2019 11:05 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
But when Obama waged war on whistle-blowers it was ok?

Let me hear you raise just one objection to Obama's heinous actions. Just one.

Obama stated that Manning's original 35-year prison sentence was "very disproportionate relative to what other leakers have received" and that "it makes sense to commute — and not pardon — her sentence."

Obama was absolutely right, but he did NOT go after a whistle-blower, no matter how many times you mischaracterize it. It was the Pentagon, not Obama's fault. Military Justice is to justice as Military Music is to music. Nothing Obama can do about that.

Obama was faced with the dilemma of Manning screwing up perfectly justifiable whistle-blowing: Chelsea Manning had access to classified databases. In early 2010, she leaked classified information to WikiLeaks and confided this to Adrian Lamo, an online acquaintance. Lamo indirectly informed the Army's Criminal Investigation Command, and Manning was arrested in May that same year. If Manning had a tiny bit of sense, and not told Lamo, Manning would have stayed out of jail. Whistle-blowing was a great idea. Getting caught was idiotic of Manning. Obama couldn't save Manning from the Military law because Obama takes law enforcement seriously, unlike Trump.

Obama had to enforce the law about stealing secrets, but also Obama obviously approved of the whistle-blowing because he commuted Chelsea Manning's sentence. He did not have to do that.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 12, 2019 7:16 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 12, 2019 7:26 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 12, 2019 8:17 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


Quote:

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Read what I wrote. Sound out the words.



I did.

This has nothing to do with the American government.

The "far right" in the UK is further left than Obama was, so I'm not seeing your point.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, April 13, 2019 9:33 AM

REAVERFAN


The Legal Narrative Funnel That’s Being Used To Extradite Assange
https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/04/13/the-legal-narrative-funnel-tha
ts-being-used-to-extradite-assange
/

Now, the US is a Free Democracy™. When you are a Free Democracy™, you can’t just go around imprisoning journalists willy nilly simply for telling the truth about your government. That’s something other countries do, bad countries, the kind of country the US routinely invades in order to help spread Freedom and Democracy™. The US would never do that. But it would diddle a bunch of narratives in such a way that just so happens to achieve exactly the same result.

As we discussed yesterday, the Trump administration’s extradition request is accompanied by criminal charges which are based on the same information which the Obama administration declined to charge Assange for, a point which has been discussed in more detail in a new article by The Intercept‘s Glenn Greenwald and Micah Lee. The Obama administration looked at the evidence and concluded that there was no way to charge Assange with anything without endangering press freedoms, then the Trump administration looked at literally the exact same evidence and said screw press freedoms, we’re going after him. They wanted to punish Assange and show the world what happens to a journalist who exposes US war crimes, so they changed the narrative to make it happen.

Pretty fashy, wouldn't you say?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, April 13, 2019 10:04 AM

THG


Assange's claim that he is a journalist is false, as he has proven time and again. That he is not a journalist, however, will not preclude authoritarian governments from using his case to thwart the legitimate media.

Over time it became evident that his quest for transparency was not universal. Instead, Assange and his group have shown their agenda is anything but that. They are curiously selective in their targets, and their work has hewed closely to Putin's agenda.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/julian-assange-is-an-activist-n
ot-a-journalist/ar-BBVQW3O?ocid=spartandhp


Assange is not a journalist. His activities are limited to attacking democratic countries. He can't be both an activist and a journalist.


T



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, April 13, 2019 7:40 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


Quote:

Originally posted by THG:
Assange's claim that he is a journalist is false, as he has proven time and again. That he is not a journalist, however, will not preclude authoritarian governments from using his case to thwart the legitimate media.

Over time it became evident that his quest for transparency was not universal. Instead, Assange and his group have shown their agenda is anything but that. They are curiously selective in their targets, and their work has hewed closely to Putin's agenda.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/julian-assange-is-an-activist-n
ot-a-journalist/ar-BBVQW3O?ocid=spartandhp


Assange is not a journalist. His activities are limited to attacking democratic countries. He can't be both an activist and a journalist.


T





If you apply that logic to all journalists out there on both sides, then you no longer have any journalists.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, April 13, 2019 7:40 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]




Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 17, 2019 3:25 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Too funny not to share



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 19, 2019 11:00 AM

REAVERFAN


Mueller Report: Assange Smeared Seth Rich to Cover for Russians
Julian Assange repeatedly blamed Seth Rich, the murdered DNC staffer, for Russia’s leaks. The Mueller report shows that Assange was lying from the start.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/mueller-report-julian-assange-smeared-se
th-rich-to-cover-for-russians


Thursday’s long-anticipated release adds new details about Assange’s interactions with the officers in Russia’s Main Intelligence Directorate. Still, it leaves one question unanswered: Why was Assange so determined to exonerate the Russian intelligence agents who gave him the material?

Hmm... That's a real head-scratcher...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 19, 2019 11:26 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Well, I noiced that Assange's arrest was timed to conveniently put him out of the way in a maximum security prison so he couldn't speak for himself after the Mueller report was issued.

It looks like Ecuador drove a hard bargain, knowing that timeliness was an issue, because they got their $4.2 billion IMF loan (which dollars to donuts the Ecudorain elite will use to line their pockets and then leave the poor holding the bag, and making them suffer thru "austerity" to pay it back.)

$4.2 billion; that's a lot more than 30 pieces of silver!

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 19, 2019 11:37 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


From te WSJ ...
Quote:

By the fall of 2017, it was clear that special counsel Robert Mueller, as a former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, was too conflicted to take a detached look at a Russia-collusion story that had become more about FBI malfeasance than about Donald Trump. The evidence of that bias now stares at us through 448 pages of his report.

President Trump has every right to feel liberated. What the report shows is that he endured a special-counsel probe that was relentlessly, at times farcically, obsessed with taking him out. What stands out is just how diligently and creatively the special counsel’s legal minds worked to implicate someone in Trump World on something Russia- or obstruction-of-justice-related. And how—even with all its overweening power and aggressive tactics—it still struck out.

Volume I of the Mueller report, which deals with collusion, spends tens of thousands of words describing trivial interactions between Trump officials and various Russians. While it doubtless wasn’t Mr. Mueller’s intention, the sheer quantity and banality of details highlights the degree to which these contacts were random, haphazard and peripheral. By the end of Volume I, the notion that the Trump campaign engaged in some grand plot with Russia is a joke.

Yet jump to the section where the Mueller team lists its “prosecution and declination” decisions with regards the Russia question. And try not to picture Mueller “pit bull” prosecutor Andrew Weissmann collapsed under mountains of federal statutes after his two-year hunt to find one that applied.

Mr. Mueller’s team mulled bringing charges “for the crime of conspiracy—either under statutes that have their own conspiracy language,” or “under the general conspiracy statute.” It debated going after them for the “defraud clause,” which “criminalizes participating in an agreement to obstruct a lawful function of the U.S. government.” It considered the crime of acting as an “agent of a foreign government”—helpfully noting that this crime does not require “willfulness.”

Up to now, the assumption was that Mr. Mueller had resurrected long-ago violations of the rarely enforced Foreign Agent Registration Act of 1938 purely to apply pressure on folks like Paul Manafort and Mike Flynn. Now we find out that it was resurrected in hopes of applying it to campaign-period actions of minor figures such as Carter Page and George Papadopoulos.

Mueller’s team even considered charging Trump associates who participated with campaign-finance violations for the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya. Was that meeting “a conspiracy to violate the foreign contributions ban”? Was it “the solicitation of an illegal foreign source contribution”? Was it the receipt of “an express or implied promise to make a [foreign source] contribution”? The team considered that the law didn’t apply only to money—it could apply to a “thing of value.”

Really??
Quote:

Until investigators realized it might be hard to prove the “promised documents” exceeded the “$2,000 threshold for a criminal violation.” The Mueller team even credited Democrats’ talking point that former Attorney General Jeff Sessions had committed perjury during his confirmation hearings—and devoted a section in the report to it.

As for obstruction—Volume II—Attorney General Bill Barr noted Thursday that he disagreed with “some of the special counsel’s legal theories.” Maybe he had in mind Mr. Mueller’s proposition that he was entitled to pursue obstruction questions, even though that was not part of his initial mandate from Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. Or maybe it was Mr. Mueller’s long description of what a prosecution of the sitting president might look like—even though he acknowledged its legal impossibility. Or it could be Mr. Mueller’s theory that while “fairness” dictates that someone accused of crimes get a “speedy and public trial” to “clear his name,” Mr. Trump deserves no such courtesy with regard to the 200 pages of accusations Mr. Mueller lodges against him.

That was Mr. Mueller’s James Comey moment. Remember the July 2016 press conference in which the FBI director berated Hillary Clinton even as he didn’t bring charges? It was a firing offense. Here’s Mr. Mueller engaging in the same practice—only on a more inappropriate scale. At least this time the attorney general tried to clean up the mess by declaring he would not bring obstruction charges. Mr. Barr noted Thursday that we do not engage in grand-jury proceedings and probes with the purpose of generating innuendo.

Mr. Mueller may not care. His report suggests the actual goal of the obstruction volume is impeachment: “We concluded that Congress has the authority to prohibit a President’s corrupt use of his authority.”

Note as well what isn’t in the report. It makes only passing, bland references to the genesis of so many of the accusations Mr. Mueller probed:

The infamous dossier produced by opposition-research firm Fusion GPS and paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign.

How do you exonerate Mr. Page without delving into the scandalous Moscow deeds of which he was falsely accused? How do you narrate an entire section on the July 2016 Trump Tower meeting without noting that Ms. Veselnitskaya was working alongside Fusion? How do you detail every aspect of the Papadopoulos accusations while avoiding any detail of the curious and suspect ways that those accusations came back to the FBI via Australia’s Alexander Downer?

The report instead mostly reads as a lengthy defense of the FBI—of its shaky claims about how its investigation began, of its far-fetched theories, of its procedures, even of its leadership. One of the more telling sections concerns Mr. Comey’s firing. Mr. Mueller’s team finds it generally beyond the realm of possibility that the FBI director was canned for incompetence or insubordination. It treats everything the FBI or Mr. Comey did as legitimate, even as it treats everything the president did as suspect.

Mr. Mueller is an institutionalist, and many on his team were the same Justice Department attorneys who first fanned the partisan collusion claims. He was the wrong man to provide an honest assessment of the 2016 collusion dirty trick. And we’ve got a report to prove it.



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 8, 2019 5:59 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


“In 20 years of work with victims of war, violence and political persecution I have never seen a group of democratic States ganging up to deliberately isolate, demonise and abuse a single individual for such a long time and with so little regard for human dignity and the rule of law,” declared Nils Melzer, the UN special rapporteur on torture.

A New Kind of Tyranny: The Global State’s War on Those Who Speak Truth to Power

The Deep State has embarked on a ruthless, take-no-prisoners, all-out assault on truth-tellers.

Activists, journalists and whistleblowers alike are being terrorized, traumatized, tortured and subjected to the fear-inducing, mind-altering, soul-destroying, smash-your-face-in tactics employed by the superpowers-that-be.

Take Julian Assange, for example.

In true Orwellian fashion ... the government would have us believe that it is Assange and Manning who are the real criminals for daring to expose the war machine’s seedy underbelly.

Since his April 2019 arrest, Assange has been locked up in a maximum-security British prison—in solitary confinement for up to 23 hours a day—pending extradition to the U.S., where if convicted, he could be sentenced to 175 years in prison.

Whatever is being done to Assange behind those prison walls—psychological torture, forced drugging, prolonged isolation, intimidation, surveillance—it’s wearing him down.

In court appearances, the 48-year-old Assange appears disoriented, haggard and zombie-like.

“In 20 years of work with victims of war, violence and political persecution I have never seen a group of democratic States ganging up to deliberately isolate, demonise and abuse a single individual for such a long time and with so little regard for human dignity and the rule of law,” declared Nils Melzer, the UN special rapporteur on torture.

It’s not just Assange who is being made to suffer, however.

Manning, who was jailed for seven years from 2010 to 2017 for leaking classified documents to Wikileaks, was arrested in March 2019 for refusing to testify before a grand jury about Assange, placed in solitary confinement for almost a month, and then sentenced to remain in jail either until she agrees to testify or until the grand jury’s 18-month term expires.

Federal judge Anthony J. Trenga of the Eastern District of Virginia also fined Manning $500 for every day she remained in custody after 30 days, and $1,000 for every day she remains in custody after 60 days, a chilling—and financially crippling—example of the government’s heavy-handed efforts to weaponize fines and jail terms as a means of forcing dissidents to fall in line.

This is how the police state deals with those who challenge its chokehold on power.

Yet while this targeted campaign—aided, abetted and advanced by the Deep State’s international alliances—is unfolding during President Trump’s watch, it began with the Obama Administration’s decision to revive the antiquated, hundred-year-old Espionage Act, which was intended to punish government spies, and instead use it to prosecute government whistleblowers.

Unfortunately, the Trump Administration has not merely continued the Obama Administration’s attack on whistleblowers. It has injected this war on truth-tellers and truth-seekers with steroids and let it loose on the First Amendment.

In May 2019, Trump’s Justice Department issued a sweeping new “superseding” secret indictment of Assange—hinged on the Espionage Act—that empowers the government to determine what counts as legitimate journalism and criminalize the rest, not to mention giving “the government license to criminally punish journalists it does not like, based on antipathy, vague standards, and subjective judgments.”


https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_comm
entary/a_new_kind_of_tyranny_the_global_states_war_on_those_who_speak_truth_to_power


read the complete article - with active links to original sources - at the link above

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 8, 2019 6:04 PM

THG


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Democrats love stomping out whistle blowers.

Do Right, Be Right. :)



2 funny...


T



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 8, 2019 7:38 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Yeah, your kind finds false arrest, solitary confinement, and torture ... funny.


A billion flies eat shit.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 9, 2019 2:38 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


What's funny about it?

He's not a whistleblower, no matter what the Legacy Media wants you to think.

This was all premeditated partisan hackery, and the details of it all are starting to unravel.



Meanwhile, true whistleblowers and heroes like Assange and Snowden get Democrats trying their damnedest to ruin their lives for their service.


Democrats are absolute shit.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 9, 2019 9:04 AM

THG


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
What's funny about it?

He's not a whistleblower, no matter what the Legacy Media wants you to think.

This was all premeditated partisan hackery, and the details of it all are starting to unravel.



Meanwhile, true whistleblowers and heroes like Assange and Snowden get Democrats trying their damnedest to ruin their lives for their service.


Democrats are absolute shit.



Trump, our government and the media disagree with you. They all describe this person as a whistleblower. Oops...
T






NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 9, 2019 9:07 AM

THG


T

Seth takes a closer look at White House officials stonewalling the impeachment inquiry as Republicans shift their defense of the President.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 9, 2019 9:57 AM

THG


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

What's funny about it?

He's not a whistleblower, no matter what the Legacy Media wants you to think. This was all premeditated partisan hackery, and the details of it all are starting to unravel. Meanwhile, true whistleblowers and heroes like Assange and Snowden get Democrats trying their damnedest to ruin their lives for their service. Democrats are absolute shit.




This Jack, this is what's funny about it. And it's your favorite person on the planet explaining what's funny. It's your favorite person on the planet explaining how it's not unraveling at all. Instead she shows how it gets worse daily for your hero. Sorry if facts hurt your head Jack. You could embrace them and get back on track.

T


Witness Paints Trump Scheme, Russian Threat In Vivid Detail





NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 9, 2019 10:05 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Eric CIAramella is not a whistle blower. He's a DNC asset and an Obama / Biden sycophant.

Everyone knows this.

The establishment are trying to gaslight useful idiots and this board is proof there's a gullible populace.

Just like the Mueller report. Just like Jessie Smollett. Just like the Covington Catholic HS kids. Just like the Kavanaugh accusations, etc..


All fake. All contrived and fabricated outrage, w/ the specific intent to sway and anger. Nothing more.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 9, 2019 10:13 AM

THG


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Eric CIAramella is not a whistle blower. He's a DNC asset and an Obama / Biden sycophant.

Everyone knows this.

The establishment are trying to gaslight useful idiots and this board is proof there's a gullible populace.

Just like the Mueller report. Just like Jessie Smollett. Just like the Covington Catholic HS kids. Just like the Kavanaugh accusations, etc..


All fake. All contrived and fabricated outrage, w/ the specific intent to sway and anger. Nothing more.



Another rube, country bumpkin expressing quaint perceptions even though the facts say otherwise.

tick tock rube

T



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 9, 2019 10:35 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


Quote:

Originally posted by THG:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Eric CIAramella is not a whistle blower. He's a DNC asset and an Obama / Biden sycophant.

Everyone knows this.

The establishment are trying to gaslight useful idiots and this board is proof there's a gullible populace.

Just like the Mueller report. Just like Jessie Smollett. Just like the Covington Catholic HS kids. Just like the Kavanaugh accusations, etc..


All fake. All contrived and fabricated outrage, w/ the specific intent to sway and anger. Nothing more.



Another rube, country bumpkin expressing quaint perceptions even though the facts say otherwise.

tick tock rube

T





Lived in the Chicago or Milwaukee suburbs all my life, retard.

If you're looking for country bumpkins, look to Nilbog.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 9, 2019 11:10 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by THG:Another rube, country bumpkin expressing quaint perceptions even though the facts say otherwise.

tick tock rube





All the name calling and insults won't save you or make your case for you.

The facts are on my side.

I understand it makes you angry, because the obvious implication is that Trump ( in this case ) continues to be President and all that entails, but that's simply too bad.

Hillary lost.

Get over it.

Trump is your President now.

Accept it. Acknowledge it. Move on.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 9, 2019 1:52 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
What's funny about it?

He's not a whistleblower, no matter what the Legacy Media wants you to think.

This was all premeditated partisan hackery, and the details of it all are starting to unravel.



Meanwhile, true whistleblowers and heroes like Assange and Snowden get Democrats trying their damnedest to ruin their lives for their service.


Democrats are absolute shit.

Quote:

Originally posted by THG:


Trump, our government and the media disagree with you. They all describe this person as a whistleblower. Oops...


Here's what the office of legal council has to say about that.
https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/ukraine-cleari
nghouse-olc-letter-to-icig-and-cigie-.2019.10.25.pdf




A billion flies eat shit.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 9, 2019 3:48 PM

THG


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by THG:Another rube, country bumpkin expressing quaint perceptions even though the facts say otherwise.

tick tock rube





All the name calling and insults won't save you or make your case for you.

The facts are on my side.

I understand it makes you angry, because the obvious implication is that Trump ( in this case ) continues to be President and all that entails, but that's simply too bad.

Hillary lost.

Get over it.

Trump is your President now.

Accept it. Acknowledge it. Move on.



You are a rube because you’re stuck on Hillary. Nothing I’m posting myself or the others here that take issue with Trump are posting has anything to do with Hillary. It’s been that way for a long time now. That’s because she has nothing to do with what’s going on with Trump. Nothing at all. This tells me you are incapable of understanding anything that isn’t pro what you want. It also makes you a rube.

tick tock

T



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 9, 2019 3:51 PM

THG


Kiki, all flies eat shit. I was waiting for you to figure that out yourself. Apparently you are incapable of doing so.

T



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 9, 2019 3:56 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

Originally posted by THG:
Kiki, all flies eat shit. I was waiting for you to figure that out yourself. Apparently you are incapable of doing so.



HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...


Thanks for the laugh!!! It's so funny when you're/your so pompously wrong! That's especially true because a really short trip to google could have told you what you needed to know. But you 'figured' you knew something. And like a lot of your 'knowledge', it was only a false belief. Pompously asserted.



So, no, ALL flies do NOT eat shit!


But since your/you're thinking seems to be very limited, let me explain the phrase to you. A billion flies eat shit. It means that something isn't true JUST BECAUSE a lot of people say-so.

It's a shorter way of illustrating the logical fallacy argumentum ad populum.

Argumentum ad populum. ... In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "argument to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition must be true because many or most people believe it, often concisely encapsulated as: "If many believe so, it is so."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 11, 2019 7:04 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.




Assange in Court 841
22 Oct, 2019 in Uncategorized by craig

UPDATE I have received scores of requests to republish and/or translate this article. It is absolutely free to use and reproduce and I should be delighted if everybody does; the world should know what is being done to Julian. So far, over 200,000 people have read it on this blogsite alone and it has already been reproduced on myriad other sites, some with much bigger readerships than my own. I have seen translations into German, Spanish and French and at least extracts in Catalan and Turkish. I only ask that you reproduce it complete or, if edits are made, plainly indicate them. Many thanks.

BEGINS

I was deeply shaken while witnessing yesterday’s events in Westminster Magistrates Court. Every decision was railroaded through over the scarcely heard arguments and objections of Assange’s legal team, by a magistrate who barely pretended to be listening.

Before I get on to the blatant lack of fair process, the first thing I must note was Julian’s condition. I was badly shocked by just how much weight my friend has lost, by the speed his hair has receded and by the appearance of premature and vastly accelerated ageing. He has a pronounced limp I have never seen before. Since his arrest he has lost over 15 kg in weight.

But his physical appearance was not as shocking as his mental deterioration. When asked to give his name and date of birth, he struggled visibly over several seconds to recall both. I will come to the important content of his statement at the end of proceedings in due course, but his difficulty in making it was very evident; it was a real struggle for him to articulate the words and focus his train of thought.

Until yesterday I had always been quietly sceptical of those who claimed that Julian’s treatment amounted to torture – even of Nils Melzer, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture – and sceptical of those who suggested he may be subject to debilitating drug treatments. But having attended the trials in Uzbekistan of several victims of extreme torture, and having worked with survivors from Sierra Leone and elsewhere, I can tell you that yesterday changed my mind entirely and Julian exhibited exactly the symptoms of a torture victim brought blinking into the light, particularly in terms of disorientation, confusion, and the real struggle to assert free will through the fog of learned helplessness.

I had been even more sceptical of those who claimed, as a senior member of his legal team did to me on Sunday night, that they were worried that Julian might not live to the end of the extradition process. I now find myself not only believing it, but haunted by the thought. Everybody in that court yesterday saw that one of the greatest journalists and most important dissidents of our times is being tortured to death by the state, before our eyes. To see my friend, the most articulate man, the fastest thinker, I have ever known, reduced to that shambling and incoherent wreck, was unbearable. Yet the agents of the state, particularly the callous magistrate Vanessa Baraitser, were not just prepared but eager to be a part of this bloodsport. She actually told him that if he were incapable of following proceedings, then his lawyers could explain what had happened to him later. The question of why a man who, by the very charges against him, was acknowledged to be highly intelligent and competent, had been reduced by the state to somebody incapable of following court proceedings, gave her not a millisecond of concern.

The charge against Julian is very specific; conspiring with Chelsea Manning to publish the Iraq War logs, the Afghanistan war logs and the State Department cables. The charges are nothing to do with Sweden, nothing to do with sex, and nothing to do with the 2016 US election; a simple clarification the mainstream media appears incapable of understanding.

The purpose of yesterday’s hearing was case management; to determine the timetable for the extradition proceedings. The key points at issue were that Julian’s defence was requesting more time to prepare their evidence; and arguing that political offences were specifically excluded from the extradition treaty. There should, they argued, therefore be a preliminary hearing to determine whether the extradition treaty applied at all.

The reasons given by Assange’s defence team for more time to prepare were both compelling and startling. They had very limited access to their client in jail and had not been permitted to hand him any documents about the case until one week ago. He had also only just been given limited computer access, and all his relevant records and materials had been seized from the Ecuadorean Embassy by the US Government; he had no access to his own materials for the purpose of preparing his defence.

Furthermore, the defence argued, they were in touch with the Spanish courts about a very important and relevant legal case in Madrid which would provide vital evidence. It showed that the CIA had been directly ordering spying on Julian in the Embassy through a Spanish company, UC Global, contracted to provide security there. Crucially this included spying on privileged conversations between Assange and his lawyers discussing his defence against these extradition proceedings, which had been in train in the USA since 2010. In any normal process, that fact would in itself be sufficient to have the extradition proceedings dismissed.
Incidentally I learnt on Sunday that the Spanish material produced in court, which had been commissioned by the CIA, specifically includes high resolution video coverage of Julian and I discussing various matters.

The evidence to the Spanish court also included a CIA plot to kidnap Assange, which went to the US authorities’ attitude to lawfulness in his case and the treatment he might expect in the United States. Julian’s team explained that the Spanish legal process was happening now and the evidence from it would be extremely important, but it might not be finished and thus the evidence not fully validated and available in time for the current proposed timetable for the Assange extradition hearings.

For the prosecution, James Lewis QC stated that the government strongly opposed any delay being given for the defence to prepare, and strongly opposed any separate consideration of the question of whether the charge was a political offence excluded by the extradition treaty. Baraitser took her cue from Lewis and stated categorically that the date for the extradition hearing, 25 February, could not be changed. She was open to changes in dates for submission of evidence and responses before this, and called a ten minute recess for the prosecution and defence to agree these steps.

What happened next was very instructive. There were five representatives of the US government present (initially three, and two more arrived in the course of the hearing), seated at desks behind the lawyers in court. The prosecution lawyers immediately went into huddle with the US representatives, then went outside the courtroom with them, to decide how to respond on the dates.

After the recess the defence team stated they could not, in their professional opinion, adequately prepare if the hearing date were kept to February, but within Baraitser’s instruction to do so they nevertheless outlined a proposed timetable on delivery of evidence. In responding to (the defense), Lewis’ junior counsel scurried to the back of the court to consult the Americans again while Lewis actually told the judge he was “taking instructions from those behind”. It is important to note that as he said this, it was not the UK Attorney-General’s office who were being consulted but the US Embassy. Lewis received his American instructions and agreed that the defence might have two months to prepare their evidence (they had said they needed an absolute minimum of three) but the February hearing date may not be moved. Baraitser gave a ruling agreeing everything Lewis had said.

At this stage it was unclear why we were sitting through this farce. The US government was dictating its instructions to Lewis, who was relaying those instructions to Baraitser, who was ruling them as her legal decision. The charade might as well have been cut and the US government simply sat on the bench to control the whole process. Nobody could sit there and believe they were in any part of a genuine legal process or that Baraitser was giving a moment’s consideration to the arguments of the defence. Her facial expressions on the few occasions she looked at the defence ranged from contempt through boredom to sarcasm. When she looked at Lewis she was attentive, open and warm.

The extradition is plainly being rushed through in accordance with a Washington dictated timetable. Apart from a desire to pre-empt the Spanish court providing evidence on CIA activity in sabotaging the defence, what makes the February date so important to the USA? I would welcome any thoughts.

Baraitser dismissed the defence’s request for a separate prior hearing to consider whether the extradition treaty applied at all, without bothering to give any reason why (possibly she had not properly memorised what Lewis had been instructing her to agree with). Yet this is Article 4 of the UK/US Extradition Treaty 2007 in full:



On the face of it, what Assange is accused of is the very definition of a political offence – if this is not, then what is? It is not covered by any of the exceptions from that listed. There is every reason to consider whether this charge is excluded by the extradition treaty, and to do so before the long and very costly process of considering all the evidence should the treaty apply. But Baraitser simply dismissed the argument out of hand.

Just in case anybody was left in any doubt as to what was happening here, Lewis then stood up and suggested that the defence should not be allowed to waste the court’s time with a lot of arguments. All arguments for the substantive hearing should be given in writing in advance and a “guillotine should be applied” (his exact words) to (defense) arguments and witnesses in court, perhaps of five hours for the defence. The defence had suggested they would need more than the scheduled five days to present their case. Lewis countered that the entire hearing should be over in two days. Baraitser said this was not procedurally the correct moment to agree this but she will consider it once she had received the evidence bundles.

(SPOILER: Baraitser is going to do as Lewis instructs and cut the substantive hearing short).


Baraitser then capped it all by saying the February hearing will be held, not at the comparatively open and accessible Westminster Magistrates Court where we were, but at Belmarsh Magistrates Court, the grim high security facility used for preliminary legal processing of terrorists, attached to the maximum security prison where Assange is being held. There are only six seats for the public in even the largest court at Belmarsh, and the object is plainly to evade public scrutiny and make sure that Baraitser is not exposed in public again to a genuine account of her proceedings, like this one you are reading. I will probably be unable to get in to the substantive hearing at Belmarsh.

Plainly the authorities were disconcerted by the hundreds of good people who had turned up to support Julian. They hope that far fewer will get to the much less accessible Belmarsh. I am fairly certain (and recall I had a long career as a diplomat) that the two extra American government officials who arrived halfway through proceedings were armed security personnel, brought in because of alarm at the number of protestors around a hearing in which were present senior US officials. The move to Belmarsh may be an American initiative.

Assange’s defence team objected strenuously to the move to Belmarsh, in particular on the grounds that there are no conference rooms available there to consult their client and they have very inadequate access to him in the jail. Baraitser dismissed their objection offhand and with a very definite smirk.

Finally, Baraitser turned to Julian and ordered him to stand, and asked him if he had understood the proceedings. He replied in the negative, said that he could not think, and gave every appearance of disorientation. Then he seemed to find an inner strength, drew himself up a little, and said:

I do not understand how this process is equitable. This superpower had 10 years to prepare for this case and I can’t even access my writings. It is very difficult, where I am, to do anything. These people have unlimited resources.

The effort then seemed to become too much, his voice dropped and he became increasingly confused and incoherent. He spoke of whistleblowers and publishers being labeled enemies of the people, then spoke about his children’s DNA being stolen and of being spied on in his meetings with his psychologist. I am not suggesting at all that Julian was wrong about these points, but he could not properly frame nor articulate them. He was plainly not himself, very ill and it was just horribly painful to watch. Baraitser showed neither sympathy nor the least concern. She tartly observed that if he could not understand what had happened, his lawyers could explain it to him, and she swept out of court.

The whole experience was profoundly upsetting. It was very plain that there was no genuine process of legal consideration happening here. What we had was a naked demonstration of the power of the state, and a naked dictation of proceedings by the Americans. Julian was in a box behind bulletproof glass, and I and the thirty odd other members of the public who had squeezed in were in a different box behind more bulletproof glass. I do not know if he could see me or his other friends in the court, or if he was capable of recognising anybody. He gave no indication that he did.

In Belmarsh he is kept in complete isolation for 23 hours a day. He is permitted 45 minutes exercise. If he has to be moved, they clear the corridors before he walks down them and they lock all cell doors to ensure he has no contact with any other prisoner outside the short and strictly supervised exercise period. There is no possible justification for this inhuman regime, used on major terrorists, being imposed on a publisher who is a remand prisoner.

I have been both cataloguing and protesting for years the increasingly authoritarian powers of the UK state, but that the most gross abuse could be so open and undisguised is still a shock. The campaign of demonisation and dehumanisation against Julian, based on government and media lie after government and media lie, has led to a situation where he can be slowly killed in public sight, and arraigned on a charge of publishing the truth about government wrongdoing, while receiving no assistance from “liberal” society.

Unless Julian is released shortly he will be destroyed. If the state can do this, then who is next?


Can you say railroaded? Sure you can.




https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/10/assange-in-court/

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 11, 2019 7:30 PM

THG


Quote:

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Quote:

Originally posted by THG:
Kiki, all flies eat shit. I was waiting for you to figure that out yourself. Apparently you are incapable of doing so.



HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...


Thanks for the laugh!!! It's so funny when you're/your so pompously wrong! That's especially true because a really short trip to google could have told you what you needed to know. But you 'figured' you knew something. And like a lot of your 'knowledge', it was only a false belief. Pompously asserted.



So, no, ALL flies do NOT eat shit!


But since your/you're thinking seems to be very limited, let me explain the phrase to you. A billion flies eat shit. It means that something isn't true JUST BECAUSE a lot of people say-so.

It's a shorter way of illustrating the logical fallacy argumentum ad populum.

Argumentum ad populum. ... In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "argument to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition must be true because many or most people believe it, often concisely encapsulated as: "If many believe so, it is so."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum]



Watch out, kiki learned a new word. As usual she thinks it justifies her aversion to the facts; it doesn't. Facts are facts kiki and there's no way around it.

Most people think the mainstream media is a good source of information. They are correct. I believe Trump is a parasite. I am correct as well.

As for some flies existing that don’t eat shit, prove it. As usual you post stuff in lieu of the facts. Links please...

There are elements in urine that drive flies and other pests away but nothing in shit.

T



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 11, 2019 7:46 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


OK - you want me to prove you wrong. And, you are. Not all flies eat shit. And here are the facts:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coprophagia
Two feces-eating insects are certain species of fly and the dung beetle.

https://www.terminix.com/blog/education/what-do-flies-eat-faqs/
Tachnid flies also feed on plant nectar as adults, but in their larval stage, they dine on other insects. Hessian flies eat grass, while bot flies eat animal tissue. Contrary to popular belief, fruit flies don't actually eat fruit. Instead, they eat the yeast cells that grow on fruit, particularly rotting fruit.

https://www.jcehrlich.com/flies/what-do-flies-eat/
What do fruit flies eat?

Fruit Flies are attracted to fermented food and liquid sources, which is why they are so common in homes and the food industry. Fruit flies search for foods such as:

Liquids: beer, wine, cider, vinegar
Fruits such as bananas, grapes, peaches, pineapples, tomatoes, mustard pickles, potatoes, onions, etc.
Sugary substances, like candy

What do blow flies eat?

Blow/bottle flies are fairly large flies with metallic blue, green, bronze or black sheen. They are infamously known for burrowing themselves into their food, which is where they develop. They are usually the first insects to arrive after an animal dies. These flies prefer:

Fresh or decaying meat
Animal carcasses



A billion flies eat shit.

But not ALL flies eat shit.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 11, 2019 7:47 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


In the meantime, while I appreciate the bump, I hope to keep the thread ON TOPIC.


Assange in Court 841
22 Oct, 2019 in Uncategorized by craig

UPDATE I have received scores of requests to republish and/or translate this article. It is absolutely free to use and reproduce and I should be delighted if everybody does; the world should know what is being done to Julian. So far, over 200,000 people have read it on this blogsite alone and it has already been reproduced on myriad other sites, some with much bigger readerships than my own. I have seen translations into German, Spanish and French and at least extracts in Catalan and Turkish. I only ask that you reproduce it complete or, if edits are made, plainly indicate them. Many thanks.

BEGINS

I was deeply shaken while witnessing yesterday’s events in Westminster Magistrates Court. Every decision was railroaded through over the scarcely heard arguments and objections of Assange’s legal team, by a magistrate who barely pretended to be listening.

Before I get on to the blatant lack of fair process, the first thing I must note was Julian’s condition. I was badly shocked by just how much weight my friend has lost, by the speed his hair has receded and by the appearance of premature and vastly accelerated ageing. He has a pronounced limp I have never seen before. Since his arrest he has lost over 15 kg in weight.

But his physical appearance was not as shocking as his mental deterioration. When asked to give his name and date of birth, he struggled visibly over several seconds to recall both. I will come to the important content of his statement at the end of proceedings in due course, but his difficulty in making it was very evident; it was a real struggle for him to articulate the words and focus his train of thought.

Until yesterday I had always been quietly sceptical of those who claimed that Julian’s treatment amounted to torture – even of Nils Melzer, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture – and sceptical of those who suggested he may be subject to debilitating drug treatments. But having attended the trials in Uzbekistan of several victims of extreme torture, and having worked with survivors from Sierra Leone and elsewhere, I can tell you that yesterday changed my mind entirely and Julian exhibited exactly the symptoms of a torture victim brought blinking into the light, particularly in terms of disorientation, confusion, and the real struggle to assert free will through the fog of learned helplessness.

I had been even more sceptical of those who claimed, as a senior member of his legal team did to me on Sunday night, that they were worried that Julian might not live to the end of the extradition process. I now find myself not only believing it, but haunted by the thought. Everybody in that court yesterday saw that one of the greatest journalists and most important dissidents of our times is being tortured to death by the state, before our eyes. To see my friend, the most articulate man, the fastest thinker, I have ever known, reduced to that shambling and incoherent wreck, was unbearable. Yet the agents of the state, particularly the callous magistrate Vanessa Baraitser, were not just prepared but eager to be a part of this bloodsport. She actually told him that if he were incapable of following proceedings, then his lawyers could explain what had happened to him later. The question of why a man who, by the very charges against him, was acknowledged to be highly intelligent and competent, had been reduced by the state to somebody incapable of following court proceedings, gave her not a millisecond of concern.

The charge against Julian is very specific; conspiring with Chelsea Manning to publish the Iraq War logs, the Afghanistan war logs and the State Department cables. The charges are nothing to do with Sweden, nothing to do with sex, and nothing to do with the 2016 US election; a simple clarification the mainstream media appears incapable of understanding.

The purpose of yesterday’s hearing was case management; to determine the timetable for the extradition proceedings. The key points at issue were that Julian’s defence was requesting more time to prepare their evidence; and arguing that political offences were specifically excluded from the extradition treaty. There should, they argued, therefore be a preliminary hearing to determine whether the extradition treaty applied at all.

The reasons given by Assange’s defence team for more time to prepare were both compelling and startling. They had very limited access to their client in jail and had not been permitted to hand him any documents about the case until one week ago. He had also only just been given limited computer access, and all his relevant records and materials had been seized from the Ecuadorean Embassy by the US Government; he had no access to his own materials for the purpose of preparing his defence.

Furthermore, the defence argued, they were in touch with the Spanish courts about a very important and relevant legal case in Madrid which would provide vital evidence. It showed that the CIA had been directly ordering spying on Julian in the Embassy through a Spanish company, UC Global, contracted to provide security there. Crucially this included spying on privileged conversations between Assange and his lawyers discussing his defence against these extradition proceedings, which had been in train in the USA since 2010. In any normal process, that fact would in itself be sufficient to have the extradition proceedings dismissed.
Incidentally I learnt on Sunday that the Spanish material produced in court, which had been commissioned by the CIA, specifically includes high resolution video coverage of Julian and I discussing various matters.

The evidence to the Spanish court also included a CIA plot to kidnap Assange, which went to the US authorities’ attitude to lawfulness in his case and the treatment he might expect in the United States. Julian’s team explained that the Spanish legal process was happening now and the evidence from it would be extremely important, but it might not be finished and thus the evidence not fully validated and available in time for the current proposed timetable for the Assange extradition hearings.

For the prosecution, James Lewis QC stated that the government strongly opposed any delay being given for the defence to prepare, and strongly opposed any separate consideration of the question of whether the charge was a political offence excluded by the extradition treaty. Baraitser took her cue from Lewis and stated categorically that the date for the extradition hearing, 25 February, could not be changed. She was open to changes in dates for submission of evidence and responses before this, and called a ten minute recess for the prosecution and defence to agree these steps.

What happened next was very instructive. There were five representatives of the US government present (initially three, and two more arrived in the course of the hearing), seated at desks behind the lawyers in court. The prosecution lawyers immediately went into huddle with the US representatives, then went outside the courtroom with them, to decide how to respond on the dates.

After the recess the defence team stated they could not, in their professional opinion, adequately prepare if the hearing date were kept to February, but within Baraitser’s instruction to do so they nevertheless outlined a proposed timetable on delivery of evidence. In responding to (the defense), Lewis’ junior counsel scurried to the back of the court to consult the Americans again while Lewis actually told the judge he was “taking instructions from those behind”. It is important to note that as he said this, it was not the UK Attorney-General’s office who were being consulted but the US Embassy. Lewis received his American instructions and agreed that the defence might have two months to prepare their evidence (they had said they needed an absolute minimum of three) but the February hearing date may not be moved. Baraitser gave a ruling agreeing everything Lewis had said.

At this stage it was unclear why we were sitting through this farce. The US government was dictating its instructions to Lewis, who was relaying those instructions to Baraitser, who was ruling them as her legal decision. The charade might as well have been cut and the US government simply sat on the bench to control the whole process. Nobody could sit there and believe they were in any part of a genuine legal process or that Baraitser was giving a moment’s consideration to the arguments of the defence. Her facial expressions on the few occasions she looked at the defence ranged from contempt through boredom to sarcasm. When she looked at Lewis she was attentive, open and warm.

The extradition is plainly being rushed through in accordance with a Washington dictated timetable. Apart from a desire to pre-empt the Spanish court providing evidence on CIA activity in sabotaging the defence, what makes the February date so important to the USA? I would welcome any thoughts.

Baraitser dismissed the defence’s request for a separate prior hearing to consider whether the extradition treaty applied at all, without bothering to give any reason why (possibly she had not properly memorised what Lewis had been instructing her to agree with). Yet this is Article 4 of the UK/US Extradition Treaty 2007 in full:



On the face of it, what Assange is accused of is the very definition of a political offence – if this is not, then what is? It is not covered by any of the exceptions from that listed. There is every reason to consider whether this charge is excluded by the extradition treaty, and to do so before the long and very costly process of considering all the evidence should the treaty apply. But Baraitser simply dismissed the argument out of hand.

Just in case anybody was left in any doubt as to what was happening here, Lewis then stood up and suggested that the defence should not be allowed to waste the court’s time with a lot of arguments. All arguments for the substantive hearing should be given in writing in advance and a “guillotine should be applied” (his exact words) to (defense) arguments and witnesses in court, perhaps of five hours for the defence. The defence had suggested they would need more than the scheduled five days to present their case. Lewis countered that the entire hearing should be over in two days. Baraitser said this was not procedurally the correct moment to agree this but she will consider it once she had received the evidence bundles.

(SPOILER: Baraitser is going to do as Lewis instructs and cut the substantive hearing short).


Baraitser then capped it all by saying the February hearing will be held, not at the comparatively open and accessible Westminster Magistrates Court where we were, but at Belmarsh Magistrates Court, the grim high security facility used for preliminary legal processing of terrorists, attached to the maximum security prison where Assange is being held. There are only six seats for the public in even the largest court at Belmarsh, and the object is plainly to evade public scrutiny and make sure that Baraitser is not exposed in public again to a genuine account of her proceedings, like this one you are reading. I will probably be unable to get in to the substantive hearing at Belmarsh.

Plainly the authorities were disconcerted by the hundreds of good people who had turned up to support Julian. They hope that far fewer will get to the much less accessible Belmarsh. I am fairly certain (and recall I had a long career as a diplomat) that the two extra American government officials who arrived halfway through proceedings were armed security personnel, brought in because of alarm at the number of protestors around a hearing in which were present senior US officials. The move to Belmarsh may be an American initiative.

Assange’s defence team objected strenuously to the move to Belmarsh, in particular on the grounds that there are no conference rooms available there to consult their client and they have very inadequate access to him in the jail. Baraitser dismissed their objection offhand and with a very definite smirk.

Finally, Baraitser turned to Julian and ordered him to stand, and asked him if he had understood the proceedings. He replied in the negative, said that he could not think, and gave every appearance of disorientation. Then he seemed to find an inner strength, drew himself up a little, and said:

I do not understand how this process is equitable. This superpower had 10 years to prepare for this case and I can’t even access my writings. It is very difficult, where I am, to do anything. These people have unlimited resources.

The effort then seemed to become too much, his voice dropped and he became increasingly confused and incoherent. He spoke of whistleblowers and publishers being labeled enemies of the people, then spoke about his children’s DNA being stolen and of being spied on in his meetings with his psychologist. I am not suggesting at all that Julian was wrong about these points, but he could not properly frame nor articulate them. He was plainly not himself, very ill and it was just horribly painful to watch. Baraitser showed neither sympathy nor the least concern. She tartly observed that if he could not understand what had happened, his lawyers could explain it to him, and she swept out of court.

The whole experience was profoundly upsetting. It was very plain that there was no genuine process of legal consideration happening here. What we had was a naked demonstration of the power of the state, and a naked dictation of proceedings by the Americans. Julian was in a box behind bulletproof glass, and I and the thirty odd other members of the public who had squeezed in were in a different box behind more bulletproof glass. I do not know if he could see me or his other friends in the court, or if he was capable of recognising anybody. He gave no indication that he did.

In Belmarsh he is kept in complete isolation for 23 hours a day. He is permitted 45 minutes exercise. If he has to be moved, they clear the corridors before he walks down them and they lock all cell doors to ensure he has no contact with any other prisoner outside the short and strictly supervised exercise period. There is no possible justification for this inhuman regime, used on major terrorists, being imposed on a publisher who is a remand prisoner.

I have been both cataloguing and protesting for years the increasingly authoritarian powers of the UK state, but that the most gross abuse could be so open and undisguised is still a shock. The campaign of demonisation and dehumanisation against Julian, based on government and media lie after government and media lie, has led to a situation where he can be slowly killed in public sight, and arraigned on a charge of publishing the truth about government wrongdoing, while receiving no assistance from “liberal” society.

Unless Julian is released shortly he will be destroyed. If the state can do this, then who is next?


Can you say railroaded? Sure you can.




https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/10/assange-in-court/

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 11, 2019 7:57 PM

THG


Kiki, none of your links suggests anything other than, based on what the flies you've listed eat, shit would be on the menu.

T



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 11, 2019 8:21 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.




Did you not post that ALL flies eat shit? It says it right here, in your post ...

Quote:

Originally posted by THG:
Kiki, all flies eat shit. I was waiting for you to figure that out yourself. Apparently you are incapable of doing so.



Do you not know what that means? It means that there are no exceptions. And yet, there ARE exceptions! Only CERTAIN flies eat shit!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coprophagia
Two feces-eating insects are certain species of fly and the dung beetle.




Or do you not understand what SHIT is? SHIT is not plant nectar. SHIT is not 'insects'. SHIT is not meat. SHIT is not grass. SHIT is not 'animal tissue'. SHIT is not yeast. SHIT is not beer, wine, cider, vinegar, fruits such as bananas, grapes, peaches, pineapples, tomatoes, mustard pickles, potatoes, onions, etc. or sugary substances, like candy. SHIT is also not fresh or decaying meat, or animal carcasses.

https://www.terminix.com/blog/education/what-do-flies-eat-faqs/
Tachnid flies also feed on plant nectar as adults, but in their larval stage, they dine on other insects. Hessian flies eat grass, while bot flies eat animal tissue. Contrary to popular belief, fruit flies don't actually eat fruit. Instead, they eat the yeast cells that grow on fruit, particularly rotting fruit.

https://www.jcehrlich.com/flies/what-do-flies-eat/
What do fruit flies eat?

Fruit Flies are attracted to fermented food and liquid sources, which is why they are so common in homes and the food industry. Fruit flies search for foods such as:

Liquids: beer, wine, cider, vinegar
Fruits such as bananas, grapes, peaches, pineapples, tomatoes, mustard pickles, potatoes, onions, etc.
Sugary substances, like candy


What do blow flies eat?

Blow/bottle flies are fairly large flies with metallic blue, green, bronze or black sheen. They are infamously known for burrowing themselves into their food, which is where they develop. They are usually the first insects to arrive after an animal dies. These flies prefer:

Fresh or decaying meat
Animal carcasses




A billion flies eat shit.

But not ALL flies eat shit.


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
The Trump Campaign Has Raised Millions Off Impeachment — And Facebook Is One of Its Most Powerful Tools
Mon, December 9, 2019 16:05 - 2 posts
Russia doping scandal continues
Mon, December 9, 2019 15:51 - 10 posts
A thread for Democrats Only
Mon, December 9, 2019 15:38 - 2942 posts
Countdown Clock to Trumps impeachment " STARTS"
Mon, December 9, 2019 15:36 - 3379 posts
North Korea
Mon, December 9, 2019 14:39 - 192 posts
what has disappeared from the news / what's not being reported
Mon, December 9, 2019 12:32 - 8 posts
Any Reasonable Folk See Any Impeachable Offences?
Mon, December 9, 2019 12:02 - 13 posts
Vote For Me You Lying Racist!
Mon, December 9, 2019 10:39 - 1 posts
Watch Impeachment Inquiry Live
Mon, December 9, 2019 09:23 - 52 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!!!
Mon, December 9, 2019 00:02 - 3462 posts
Another delusion dispelled
Sun, December 8, 2019 23:45 - 55 posts
JO 753 for Prezident!
Sun, December 8, 2019 17:29 - 471 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL