Killing the First Amendment

The illegal and unwarranted prosecution of Julian Assange by the US Government in a British court, if court it is and not a Star Chamber, is in fact the prosecution of the First Amendment. It will prevent journalists in the future from informing the public of criminal activity by government. This is already the case in a number of countries, and the US and UK are about to join them. Washington, working through a British judge and a British prosecutor, is murdering the First Amendment and, thereby, accountable government.

The US government’s case for Assange’s extradition to the US that is working its way through a CIA-suborned British court redefines journalists who hold government accountable as spies. In other words, journalists who reveal criminal actions of governments are quilty of espionage. If this were in fact the case, the New York Times would have been prosecuted for publishing the Pentagon Papers...

Once upon a time when law still ruled a person had to spy on his own country in order to have committed a crime. Julian Assange is an Australian citizen, but he is accused of committing espionage against the United States while living in Europe. If this were a crime under law, all the Israeli Mossad spies spying on the United States would be arrested and treated as Assange. Indeed, all spies of all countries spying on other countries, including the CIA and the British MI6, could be arrested and tried for espionage in the countries that they are spying on....

What is happening to Assange is worse than a Stalnist show trial, but no presstitute has raised a voice...

Journalists long ago ceased to be journalists and became propagandists for the CIA and the ruling elites. What little independence American journalism ever had was destroyed by the Clinton regime’s acquiescence to the concentration of 90% of the US media in six hands...

All great evil, such as is being practiced against Julian Assange, has unintended consequences. What the US and UK are doing is digging their own graves as democracies....

The question that we need to ask ourselves, and the question that President Trump needs to ask himself, is why is Trump supporting the fabricated case of the corrupt Obama regime against Julian Assange. Is the answer that Trump feels that he cannot go against the wishes of the military/security complex when he faces the prospect of a color revolution to overturn his reelection?...

The British courts will soon be deciding the fate of the Australian journalist Julian Assange, a man who has been unjustly charged as a criminal. Assange committed no crime. He is a champion of the cause of freedom.

The UK will say whether it will accept or deny the request for the extradition of Assange to the US, where he will face 18 charges brought against him by the government of that country. If he is extradited, Assange, 49, could be tried and sentenced to up to 175 years in prison, the equivalent of a life sentence...

This is the first time in the history of the US that a journalist has been indicted under the Espionage Act for publishing truthful information. The world knows, however, that Assange never spied on the US. What he did was publish documents he received from Chelsea Manning, a US Army intelligence analyst who served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Manning was tried, convicted and sentenced to 35 years in prison. She [he] served nearly seven years before her sentence was commuted by President Barack Obama in 2017.

We all know why the US government wants to seek vengeance against Assange. In partnership with the New York Times, El País, Le Monde, the Guardian and Der Spiegel, Assange revealed the atrocities and war crimes committed by the US during the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, and the torture to which the prisoners in Guantánamo were subjected...

We know that the accusations against Assange represent a direct assault on the first amendment rights guaranteed by the US constitution, which guarantees freedom of the press and expression. We know that treaties between the US and the UK prohibit the extradition of persons accused of political crimes....

Ambassador Murray is upfront: “I strongly expect the final decision was made in this case even before opening arguments were received.”

Although the hearing is being conducted in a British court, the US government has controlled the hearing and has determined what evidence could be presented:

“The plan of the US Government throughout has been to limit the information available to the public and limit the effective access to a wider public of what information is available. Thus we have seen the extreme restrictions on both physical and video access. A complicit mainstream media has ensured that those of us who know what is happening are very few in the wider population.”

Even Ambassador Murray’s reports on the hearing are censored by social media...

It is obvious from the behavior of the British court that the extradition hearing is orchestrated to set Assange up as guilty of whatever false charges Washington wishes to make. The presstitutes will explain that the fact the British court allowed Assange to be handed over to Washington is (1) proof that the British have concluded that he will be treated well and get a fair trial, and (2) proof that the British have determined that there is a strong case against Assange. Otherwise, the presstitutes will say, the British would not have handed Assange over to Washington...

Assange’s conviction will become a precedent, and no journalist will ever again publish leaked (“stolen”) information revealing crimes of government. As time passes, investigations by congressional committees will find themselves hampered in the same way. Voting in elections will continue, but accountable government will not....