“Society as we knew it no longer exists, what exists is a transnational security elite that is busy all the time in carrying out global carnage using taxpayers’ tax money. To combat this elite it is not enough to do called, we have to take it by storm. We have to forge our own networks of shared strengths and values that can challenge the strength and selfish values of the warmongers in each of our countries, who have chained their hands in an alliance of the United States with each NATO country, with Australia, to appropriate that money and launder it in Afghanistan, launder it in Iraq, launder it in Somalia, launder it in Yemen, launder it in Pakistan To launder it with the blood of those people… because the objective is not to achieve. To subjugate Afghanistan, the goal is to use Afghanistan to launder the money of the taxpayers of the United States and the taxpayers of the European powers through war and return it to the pockets of transnational security elites. That is why its objective is not to win any war, but to maintain wars endlessly…”
Julian Assange
It is too early to assess all the facets of the recent news of Julian Assange’s release, but there is no doubt that it brings to light the criminal nature of the global alliance dominated by large corporations and represented by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), promoter of the agenda of endless war throughout the world, which has worked hard to punish by all means Wikileaks’ demonstration of the fallacy of the lofty ideals that are wielded in order to motivate and justify before the world public, through strings of lies and hidden excesses, this endless exercise of brute force of military power.
Going back to the root of the process, Julian Assange was persecuted by the United States government seeking to judge him in order to take exemplary revenge against a foreign journalist who did nothing more than fulfill his duty of publishing information of interest that denounced crimes committed by US government agents who do not respect the laws.
In a recent interview with Edward Snowden, who has remained a refugee in Russia since 2012 as a fugitive from an accusation similar to that of Assange, he denounced that what prevented him from returning to his country was the American practice of using a law written in 1917. , in the midst of the incorporation of the United States into the European war at that time, and established with the title of the Anti-Espionage Act, which was made with the intention of combating secret agents in the service of enemy countries and applying said law. in practice against journalists and other representatives of civil society who publish documents classified as secret by the government. That is obviously a mistake, but it is not the only one, nor even the first in this case.
The first person convicted in this case was Private Chelsea Manning, who was the person who actually extracted the classified documents and made them available to Wikileaks through Assange. In 2013 he was tried, dishonourably discharged from the army and sentenced by a military court to 35 years in prison, but was released in May 2017 just four years later thanks to a pardon granted by President Obama three days before the end of his term.
Others who should have been equally convicted before Manning himself at that time were the commanders who neglected the servers that store the government’s confidential information, or the government officials who openly committed crimes that are condemned by American laws and that are denounced. with evidence from said documents.
In fact, the US Constitution is supposed to establish the division of powers between the administration, the legislature and the judiciary, and the Bill of Rights attached to it establishes the right to freedom of expression, but it turns out that these arguments cannot be used in the case of a defendant under that law to have a jury determine his innocence or guilt at trial. Much less if it turns out that the defendant is not a US citizen, as is the case of Julian Assange.
That was the reason for Assange’s endless persecution and confinement, the first seven years as a refugee protected by the right of asylum of the state of Ecuador in its embassy in London, until the shameful betrayal of Lenin Moreno who thus used the flag of his country so that the London police kidnapped a person protected by the right of asylum and took him in chains to the highest security prison in that country because his extradition was requested by the United States government.
Although the pretext for Assange’s persecution at the time was a rape charge before a Swedish court, a charge that would be exposed as an equally criminal fabrication and dismissed during Assange’s long imprisonment, the US government maintained the extradition request in order to try him in the United States under the aforementioned espionage law and sentence him to life in prison, denying him all rights and as revenge against a journalist, accused there as an alleged agent, for publishing official documents classified as secret by officials of the United States government.
If this arbitrary and intricate web of persecutions were not enough to draw our attention to the sordid nature of this epic, there is something that Edward Snowden has also made clear in the aforementioned interview, and that is that he has radically changed the scenario to guarantee the fair legal process of what in English has been called a whistleblower, which is a person who publicly draws attention to an illegality committed by the government.
According to Anglo-Saxon law (Common Law), established by judicial precedents approved by recognized courts, any precedence would make it reliable to identify the justice applied in previous equivalent cases to apply it in the outcome of any legal process.
It turns out that this is only the case if the powers allow it, and in recent similar cases the accumulation of evidence recorded by the ubiquitous kidnapping of private information from individuals has been used by said powers to exact revenge in the face of any similar challenge.
As Snowden highlights, the complicity of corporate media agencies and representatives of the judiciary with corporate financial and industrial powers does not guarantee the fairness of any legal procedure in the United States. The whistleblowers of the Nixon administration’s complicity in the Watergate case have said publicly that there are no longer guarantees for the protection of journalists because editors will no longer face security elites to defend them, as they did at the beginning of the decade. of the 70s of the last century in that notorious case, and that despite the fact that the precedents of that time were supposed to invalidate the current accusation.
On the morning of Tuesday, June 25, Assange boarded a flight from a private airport to the territory of the Mariana Islands en route to Australia. To do so, he agreed to appear before a federal judge and plead guilty to only one of the charges against him, that of conspiring with Chelsea Manning to obtain the documents that she made public.
According to what Judge Napolitano estimates in his podcast titled Judging Liberties in an interview with Dr. Jeffrey Sachs, this is a fraudulent accusation in any case because the journalist’s duty is to publish any information that is of interest to the public, but it turns out that this is the blackmail formulated by the prosecution to dismiss the remaining accusations and release Assange, but not before giving him a sentence of 62 months in prison, which is equivalent to the time he was already locked up in the high-security British prison of Belmarsh. Thus, blackmail in the face of the offer of freedom justifies the unjust imprisonment, which should never have happened.
The Mariana Islands are tiny volcanic atolls in the middle of the Pacific Ocean and very close to the international date line, which have been a protectorate of the United States since 1945 and are apparently the most remote place in the continental United States en route from London to Australia where there is a United States federal judge before whom Assange appears on the way to his release.
In this way we learn that in addition to an illegal prison outside of any jurisdiction in Guantanamo, there is a US federal court in the middle of nowhere in the Pacific Ocean on the territory of Saipan. These places and the eight hundred US military bases are the tentacles of the empire extending its abuses and double standards throughout the world.
It is worth noting that, as Assange himself mentioned in the quote preceding this article, it was the persistent, growing and universal popular demonstration in support of Julian Assange, facing the powers of the imperial war clique and its allies, which forced the US government to seek this solution to this shameful scandal.
We still need to know if Assange manages to reach his destination safely in Australia, his country of birth, and if he does so as a truly free citizen, even if he has to carry for life with an admitted criminal record for having committed a crime that He never starred when he fulfilled his duty as a journalist by publishing documents that reported the criminal procedures of the US government and its allies.
This saga is not over yet and we must remain attentive to its course, because it is not only the fate of Julian Assange that is at stake, but the fate of millions of citizens around the planet in the face of the abusive power of the criminal clique that seeks to maintain at all costs the inequity of its increasingly fragile domination over the rest of humanity.
