119

Assange lawyers’ links to US govt & Bill Browder raises questions

The network of lawyers in conflicting roles in Browder, Assange and US government cases raises questions about Julian Assange’s defense.

Lucy Komisar

A US government lawyer in the Assange extradition case just wrote a London Times oped promoting the Browder Magnitsky hoax. Ben Brandon is one of five lawyers in a London network whose spokes link to convicted tax fraudster William Browder, the U.S. government, and to both sides of the extradition case against whistleblower publisher Julian Assange.

Here is how the British legal system works. Lawyers are either solicitors who work with clients or barristers who go to court in cases assigned by the solicitors. To share costs, barristers operate in chambers, which provide office space, including conference rooms and dining halls, clerks who receive and assign cases from solicitors, and other support staff. London has 210 chambers. There are not “partners” sharing profits, but members operate fraternally with each other.

Browder is key in the U.S. demonization of Russia. Assange has exposed U.S. war crimes. For lawyers associated in the British legal system to take both sides on that conflict would appear to be an egregious conflict of interest. But it fits with the U.S.-UK support of the Browder-Magnitsky hoax and their cooperation in the attack on Assange.

The law firm and chambers involved in the Browder-Assange stories are Mishcon de Reya, Matrix Chambers and Doughty Street Chambers.

Ben Brandon of Mishcon de Reya and Alex Bailin of Matrix Chambers co-authored an opinion article in The Times of London October 24, 2019 in which they repeated William Browder’s fabrications about the death of his accountant Sergei Magnitsky.

The article aimed to promote the Magnitsky Act which builds a political wall against Russia. It is based on the fake claim that Magnitsky, the accountant who handled Browder’s tax evasion in Russia, was really a lawyer who exposed a government scam.

Except that is not true, there is no evidence for it, and the lies are documented here. But the Act has prevented the Russians from collecting about $100 million Browder owes in back taxes and illicit stock buys.

Brandon’s and Bailin’s connections are notable. Law firms, at least in the U.S., tend to stake out their commitments. Lawyers who represent unions do not represent companies fighting unions. It appears to be different in Britain, where legal chambers have members on either side of some cases.

Bailin is a member of Matrix Chambers, which was founded by the wife of Tony Blair, the former neocon Labor British Prime Minister.

He is solidly in the Browder camp. He represented Leonid Nevzlin, a major partner of Browder collaborator Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who according to filings with FARA (the Foreign Agents Registration Act), paid $385,000 for Congress to adopt the Magnitsky Act which has been used by the U.S. as a weapon against the Russian government.

Nevzlin’s suit was for $50 billion against Russia for money allegedly lost by the nationalization of Yukos Oil. Yukos was obtained by Khodorkovsky in the mid-90s in one of then Russian President Boris Yeltsin’s rigged auctions. Khodorkovsky’s bank Menatep ran the auction.

He paid $309 million for a controlling 78 percent of the state company. Months later, Yukos traded on the Russian stock exchange at a market capitalization of $6 billion. Not surprising, after Yeltsin departed, the state wanted the stolen assets back.

To add insult to injury, Khodorkovsky laundered profits from Yukos through transfer-pricing and other scams.

Transfer pricing is when you sell products to a shell company at a fake low price, and the shell sells them on the world market at the real price, giving you the rake-off. It cheats tax authorities and minority shareholders. See how Khodorkovsky and Browder did this with Russian company Avisma, which Khodorkovsky also got through a rigged auction.

The Times oped co-author, Brandon of Mishcon de Reya, has a startling connection. The day after an extradition request targeting Julian Assange was signed by the UK home secretary, Brandon representing the U.S. government, formally opened the extradition case.

Now look at another Assange link. Mark Summers, who is representing Julian Assange is, along with Bailin, a member of Matrix Chambers.

But while he is Assange’s lawyer, Summers is acting for Assange’s persecutor, the U.S. government, in a major extradition case involving executives of Credit Suisse in 2013 making fake loans and getting kickbacks from Mozambique government officials.

Does Assange, or those who care about his interests, know he is part of chambers working for the U.S. government?

And where do you put this factoid? Alex Bailin is representing Andrew Pearse, one of the Credit Suisse bankers that the U.S. government, represented by Summers, is seeking to extradite!

But there’s chambers where two members are each supporting both Browder and Assange.

Geoffrey Robertson is founder of Doughty Street Chambers. He is also a longtime Browder / Magnitsky story promoter. He has pitched implementation of a Magnitsky Act in Australia and has served Browder in UK court.

In 2017 British legal actions surrounding an inquest into the death of Alexander Perepilichnyy, he represented Browder, who claimed that the Russian, who died of a heart attack, was somehow a victim of Russian President Putin. Perepilichnyy had lost money in investments he was handling for clients and had to get out of town.

Needing support, he decamped to London and gave Browder documents relating to his client’s questionable bank transfers. He died after a jog, Browder claimed he was poisoned by a rare botanical substance, obviously ordered by Putin, but forensic tests found that untrue. Robertson accused local police of a cover-up.

He is a legal advisor to Assange and is regularly interviewed by international media about the case.

Jennifer Robinson of Doughty Street Chambers also has a Browder connection. She is acting for Paul Radu a journalist and official of the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) which is being sued by an Azerbaijan MP. OCCRP is a Browder collaborator.

Browder admits in a deposition that OCCRP prepared documents he would give to the U.S. Justice Department to accuse the son of a Russian railway official of getting $1.9 million of $230 million defrauded from the Russian Treasury. The case was settled when the U.S. couldn’t prove the charge, and the target declined to spend more millions of dollars in his defense. OCCRP got the first Magnitsky Human Rights award, set up for Browder’s partners and acolytes.

Robinson is also the longest-serving member of Assange’s legal team. She acted for Assange in the Swedish extradition proceedings and in relation to Ecuador’s request to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights Advisory Opinion proceedings on the right to asylum.

Why did Assange or his advisors choose lawyers associated with the interests of the U.S. government and Browder? Or how could those lawyers be so ignorant about the facts of Browder’s massive tax evasion and his Magnitsky story fabrications?

It raises questions about how they are handling the Assange defense.

The individuals cited were asked to respond to points made about them, but none did.

Here is my audio interview on this issue on Fault Lines, “The Avisma Scandal + The Link Between Browder & Assange.” The Browder-Assange part starts 13:20 minutes in.

SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN

If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.

For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

119 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
dagnyrtaggert
dagnyrtaggert
Jan 14, 2021 10:28 AM

Amal Clooney rode Assange’s coattails to a very profitable marriage that included becoming a top bundler for Hillary Clinton and best pals with the Obamas. Robinson rode in a boat with Bill Murray to the Clooney wedding. Amal uses the Magnitsky Act in every one of her cases (see: Nasheed in the Maldives, etc) and is ‘press freedom ambassador” to the UK. Explain why she has not been asked about much of anything.

Adrian @ J'Accuse
Adrian @ J'Accuse
Nov 11, 2019 8:24 PM

Doughty Streeter Amal Clooney joins such other colourful characters as Meghan McCain (yes, that McCain) and career conman Bill Browder in London this week (November 14, 2019) to hand out awards named after the accountant, Sergei Magnitsky, who, for years, engaged in criminal tax evasion and fraud with Browder et al – exploiting disabled people – an Afghan war veteran, a Chernobyl nuclear plant clean-up victim, people with mental disabilities and more – as part of their crimes.

You really can’t make this up.

John Gilberts
John Gilberts
Nov 10, 2019 6:32 PM

So good to see this issue finally emerge. It has long been obvious that something funny has been going on with Assange’s defense team. Not only the Browder links and US State Dept asset Amal Clooney but even earlier. ‘Alan Dershowitz joins Julian Assange team’: Politico, Feb 2011. Julian is not only being tortured to death in Belmarsh in full view of the world, he is also being lawyered to death.

MASTER OF UNIVE
MASTER OF UNIVE
Nov 10, 2019 5:26 PM

Looks like the UK justice system is mere bait & switch collusion & cartel corruption disguised as jurisprudence. I guess the robes & court regalia will be enough to ensure a fair trial & justice for journalist Assange.

History advises us to shoot all the lawyers first.

MOU

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 10, 2019 8:20 AM

I have doubts Magnitsky died as reported. We see photos of him in a casket but could he simply be alive with his eyes closed or some other ruse used? Waxwork? https://www.google.com/search?q=sergei+magnitsky+casket&sxsrf=ACYBGNRXRiweI_ASed75SuFLU7I6flWP7A:1573372654845&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjn08Pxld_lAhWDfn0KHcByCXEQ_AUIEigB&biw=1920&bih=937 Like Perepilichnyy (comment below) we have different versions and if we accept the phenomenon that they always give us clues when they’re hoaxing us including different versions of the story this is quite something. Was Putin in on this himself somehow? It makes no sense to me. BBC – within the same article!: Mr Magnitsky died in prison in 2009 – allegedly after beatings – but Russia dropped an investigation into his death Mr Magnitsky is said to have died of acute heart failure and toxic shock, caused by untreated pancreatitis. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-20626960 WaPo The court declared that “by depriving” Magnitsky of “important medical care, the domestic authorities unreasonably put his life in danger.” As Magnitsky reported intensifying pain,… Read more »

Sophie - Admin1
Admin
Sophie - Admin1
Nov 10, 2019 8:38 AM
Reply to  Petra Liverani

Dying ‘after’ being beaten isn’t the same as dying of being beaten. The language is loose but there’s not any contradiction. Their claim is Magnitsky was beaten and then died later of a neglected medical condition.

Of course this scenario is challenged by many.

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 10, 2019 10:20 AM

The versions are considerably different regardless. The story of his death simply strikes me as unconvincing apart from the version issue. I have not read anything about Magnitsky till this article and didn’t know many challenged it. So if his death was a hoax does that not imply Putin was in on it?

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 10, 2019 11:32 PM

On reflection, I’d like to clarify my response below and repeat yet again a point I keep trying to get through but somehow never can. Firstly, I made no mention of “contradiction” in my comment so your response is a bit of a strawman. Secondly: Dying ‘after’ being beaten isn’t the same as dying of being beaten. The language is loose but there’s not any contradiction. Their claim is Magnitsky was beaten and then died later of a neglected medical condition. Let’s just take my quote from the BBC. In my quote, what I should have done was put an ellipsis between the two references to death. Mr Magnitsky died in prison in 2009 – allegedly after beatings – but Russia dropped an investigation into his death … Further down the page … Mr Magnitsky is said to have died of acute heart failure and toxic shock, caused by untreated… Read more »

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 13, 2019 9:00 AM

I think it’s very sad that you don’t recognise the phenomenon of “revelation of the method”. I really do. Of course, you like most other people. The power elite have generously exposed to us the weapon that they use against that we, when in possession of the knowledge of it, can use against them and yet we shun this power that they hand to us on a platter. We turn our heads from it, we explain their in-your-face nonsense away with “loose” reporting. And – of course – the power elite know that we will do this. After all, they’ve been reporting in-your-face nonsense since at least the Great Fire of London in 1666 – and how well has the phenomenon of “revelation of the method” caught on among the plebs in 3 and a half centuries? https://off-guardian.org/2019/09/01/the-great-fire-of-london-cui-bono/ But when members of the power elite pass on their wisdom to… Read more »

MikeT
MikeT
Feb 29, 2020 10:27 AM

No, there is no evidence Magnitsky was beaten. His mother says he was neglected but never mentions a beating when she’s interviewed in Nekrasov’s film. The Moscow Public Utility Commission Report Browder cites mentions no beating. Nor do either of the two documents Browder links to on his Magnitsky website. This article is long but this stuff is covered in second half. https://aclearerpicture.net/2019/04/22/how-one-incredibly-unreliable-mans-preposterous-story-about-russia-just-might-get-us-all-killed/

mark
mark
Nov 10, 2019 3:11 PM
Reply to  Petra Liverani

Browder embellished the story adding new lies with each telling. The beating up in his cell by a gang of thugs was a very late addition.

Adrian @ J'Accuse
Adrian @ J'Accuse
Nov 10, 2019 8:53 PM
Reply to  mark

Career conman Browder brings to mind the old saying heard on Wall Street/Bay Street etc. – Q: “How do you know when broker/promoter (fill-in-the-blank) is lying?” A: “His lips move.” Very public, official, records, (eg. those collected in the Prevezon docket in US SDNY court), establish Sergei Magnitsky’s an accountant engaged in criminal deceptions/fraud together with Browder’s team for a decade before BB’s official myth of a whistle-blower is manufactured. That such simple due diligence is not reflected by the positions and statements of legal minds that now envelope Julian Assange tells us plenty. This intro to matters, from my site, applies as well in this thread, as to the previous one in which it’s posted: Criminal Case Number 153123 Before the Magnitsky myth is the reality. In the 1990s, along with the arrival of legitimate operators, predatory capitalists invaded the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR 1922 –… Read more »

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Nov 9, 2019 6:31 PM

Huzzah!Here’s a Lawyer for our times.

Sidney Powell.

I bet SHE doesn’t pronounce it as ‘Poll’…

https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2019/11/understanding-what-sidney-powell-is-doing-to-kill-the-case-against-michael-flynn-by-larry-c-johnson.html

There really was’ no there,there’.

The conspiracy revealed and who was in the room the day before Flynn was interviewed and false records presented. BANG.

They are toast.

The next link up the chain won’t be far behind.

Just as with the Epstein case and Miami Heralds lawyers role, I once again think the US system has more ‘leverage’. Maybe JA may get a fairer trial and representation there?

Jen
Jen
Nov 9, 2019 7:54 PM
Reply to  Dungroanin

Presumably once Assange is extradited to the US. Are you suggesting that he should be? I thought the argument here is that he should not be extradited but should be freed instead and allowed to stay in the UK or leave of his own free will.

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins
Nov 10, 2019 8:12 AM
Reply to  Jen

It should be clear to all, in the absence of adequate UK Laws for Communications & Media ownership & control, especially constitutionally, it’s time for revision & change in UK Law, which was precisely where Lord Justice was headed, with his offer to Ms. May. (May stomped on that idea, immediately!)

Trump has an uncanny knack of forcing people to play their ‘hands’, whilst being entirely UNDIPLOMATIC about it. Think about it: whose fault is this ? The USA ??

No damn way ! You Brits. best get your lazy asses out of your worn out comfy chairs, especially Jeremy Corbyn. For Example: Make a huge national fuss, by doing a Citizen’s Arrest of Judge Arbuthnot, for NOT RECUSING HERSELF !

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins
Nov 10, 2019 8:16 AM
Reply to  Tim Jenkins

Oh, and NEVER TRUST LAWYERS, logic !

They work for big money and can still lose a case, deliberately: and just like Doctors, try and find a Lawyer who will initiate a process against another Lawyer. Good luck with that, especially proving the Mens Rea . . .

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins
Nov 10, 2019 8:31 AM
Reply to  Tim Jenkins

Correction Lord Justice LEVESON was headed

andyoldlabour
andyoldlabour
Nov 9, 2019 6:20 PM

If this is true about Summers, working for both Assange and the US Government, then this is a “Conflict of Interest”, and it is in contravention of the Solicitors Accounts Rules. It is a very serious breach.

https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/guidance/ethics-guidance/unregulated-organisations—conflict-and-confidentiality/

https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/support-services/practice-management/client-care/engaging-clients/conflict-of-interests/

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 9, 2019 10:12 PM
Reply to  andyoldlabour

Not to mention he worked on the hoaxed, 9/11 and post-9/11 anthrax attacks.

Fred
Fred
Nov 10, 2019 12:09 AM
Reply to  andyoldlabour

Summers etc at the Matrix Chambers and Doughty Streets Chambers are not law firms. They are advocates that are self employed but share facilities. This both sides from same chambers of barristers is common. Not saying its good but it is as it is. The obvious confidentiality issue is just ignored by barrister profession. The SRA governs solicitors. These lawyers are barristers are not solicitors and are not governed by the SRA or members of the Law Soc. Barristers are governed by the Bar Standards Board. This is not a story just a comment on what goes on every day in the UK.

andyoldlabour
andyoldlabour
Nov 10, 2019 10:23 AM
Reply to  Fred

Cheers Fred, yes I read it through again and realised he is a barrister and not a solicitor. It would seem that solicitors are bound by more stringent conflict rules than “briefs”.

Adrian @ J'Accuse
Adrian @ J'Accuse
Nov 10, 2019 10:33 AM
Reply to  Fred

As per your comment, serious reform is apparently needed. Julian Assange’s case is a good time to start – to ensure he’s being served in his own best interest and safety. Some of the same players are subject of commentary regarding 2013+ conduct in Libyan matters as well eg. see Matrix Chambers’ Conflict of Interest with their Clients: Libya and Abdulla Senussi This article says: “Matrix Chambers’ members represent BOTH sides of the same issue facing Libya at the ICC. Simultaneously, Matrix Chambers’ Philippe Sands and Michelle Butler represent Libya while Matrix Chambers’ Ben Emmerson represents Abdulla Senussi. As a result, Matrix lawyers have filed briefs before the ICC to both retain Abdulla Senussi on Libyan soil and to move him to the International Criminal Court in the Netherlands.” And “Leigh Day are the solicitors who have been managing the al-Saadi/Belhadj case. However, Leigh Day then “instructed“ lawyers from Matrix… Read more »

Loftwork
Loftwork
Nov 10, 2019 1:03 PM

Doughty Street is entitled to complain about the behaviour of their competition, Matrix, although it seems surprising they don’t take these grave issues to the Bar Standards Board. However it needs repeating that a Chambers is a collection of self-employed individuals for administrative convenience, not a US-style law factory. Almost all of these comments should be directed to the relevant solicitors, not the barristers they instruct.

Loftwork
Loftwork
Nov 10, 2019 12:54 PM
Reply to  andyoldlabour

It might be, if he was a solicitor. He’s a barrister. Bar Handbook rule C21.3 Guidance:

“However, where there is a conflict of interest between an existing client or clients and a prospective client or clients or two or more prospective clients, you may be entitled to accept instructions or to continue to act on a particular matter where you have fully disclosed to the relevant clients and prospective clients (as appropriate) the extent and nature of the conflict; they have each provided their informed consent to you acting; and you are able to act in the best interests of each client and independently as required by CD2 and CD4.”

With respect, it is most unlikely that any barrister involved in a high profile case of this nature would not have met these requirements, since the hypothetical gain is trivial compared to the likelihood of being struck off.

Adrian @ J'Accuse
Adrian @ J'Accuse
Nov 9, 2019 12:19 AM

The Telegraph reports on a 2015 private dinner in the home of Doughty Street‘s Geoffrey Robertson at which the Magnitsky myth and sanctions against Russia are pitched to then-Labour-Party-leader Ed Miliband, and Doughty Street lawyer Amal Clooney and co.:
Revealed: Ed Miliband’s dinner with George and Amal Clooney

Today we find aforementioned Browder/Magnitsky touts Alex Bailin, QC (Matrix lawyer and “legal writer for The Guardian, The Times and The Lawyer – co-writer of the bogus FT Magnitsky column with Ben Brandon), and Geoffrey Robertson, QC (Doughty Street’s eminence grise), both on the Advisory Board of Amal Clooney’s “TrialWatch” (part of the Clooney “Foundation for Justice“): TrialWatch® Advisory Board

universal
universal
Nov 9, 2019 12:05 AM

The tentacles of the deep state (no longer secret now) are clamping on our life so tightly that one would honestly wish that one of those extraterrestrial rocks would smash into this planet causing total annhilation –just in order to get rid of these psychopathic mongrels ruling over us.

I am not sure, though, fantasy could solve problems!

RobG
RobG
Nov 8, 2019 11:45 PM

The Julian Assange stuff is just one of the final nails in the coffin of freedom and democracy.

Anyone who believes otherwise joins the club of the five-year-olds on LSD who presently rule us.

Five-year-olds (metaphorically speaking), I may add, who are all going to be held to account.

We are coming for you scum.

Be afraid.

Be very afraid.

Betrayed planet
Betrayed planet
Nov 9, 2019 9:39 AM
Reply to  RobG

How do we fight back? I have been trying to rally support for many years. It is virtually impossible to get people to respond to the call that we now live under fascist regimes. Many times I have given up only to become even more incensed with fury at the behaviour of the psychopaths running the show.
I cannot see a way out at the moment. How do we get these vermin to fear us let alone be taken down by us?

Cassandra2
Cassandra2
Nov 9, 2019 5:14 PM

There is only ‘ONE WAY’, 99% of the global community must unite to defeat and eliminate the threat being imposed by the 1% (in reality the hardcore possibly only 0.001%).

This may seem an impossible task but it simply requires a communications/media strategy
capable of enabling people to join a ‘movement’ offering not only to defeat the ‘buggers’ but create a whole new Decentralized World Order as the antithesis to the Centralized World Order they’ve built to control, subjugate and eradicate us.

We need something for the future capable of completely eliminating a problem that has bedeviled humanity throughout history due to the pathology of the 1%.

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 10, 2019 2:38 AM
Reply to  Cassandra2

Cassandra, it would be at least 1%, probably significantly more, if you include the collaborators – I think it’s worth including the collaborators as they play a significant role, though perhaps we’re all on the collaboration continuum to some degree.

A truth’s initial commotion is directly proportional to how deeply the lie was believed. It wasn’t the world being round that agitated people, but that the world wasn’t flat.

When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.

​The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves.

Dresden James

Cassandra2
Cassandra2
Nov 10, 2019 6:09 PM
Reply to  Petra Liverani

Petra, I agree, collaborators (many unwitting of the extremities of the end-game) possibly exceeds 10%. The remaining 90%, as ably defined by your inclusion of Dresden James’s observation, highlights the principle problem of launching an effective counter attack. Since 1946 the people have been subjected to a form of ‘mass conditioning’, on many fronts, using highly effective and proven scientific techniques applied 24/7 by an industrialized sized propaganda machine employing thousands. This enterprise, which has expended 100’s of £billions, reflects the depth of their pockets, their malign intent and the power and influence of they possess to get away with it. I.E. why are our political represents not highlighting this gross perversion of social manipulation? (silly question) Our only hope in regard to igniting public awareness and an active counter-response lies, I consider, in ‘THEM’ overplaying their hand. Technology, since the mid-seventies, has quickened the pace of their game. They… Read more »

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 11, 2019 8:12 AM
Reply to  Cassandra2

I think the new model will probably happen organically when the massively deleterious effects of climate change very seriously afflict us. The bushfires in Australia at the moment are very, very scary. But we’re probably doomed regardless.

Cassandra2
Cassandra2
Nov 11, 2019 12:09 PM
Reply to  Petra Liverani

Interesting, your response demonstrates what we are up against – re: ‘When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.’ (Dresden James).

Climate change is a complete hoax and a scam.

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 11, 2019 12:33 PM
Reply to  Cassandra2

I’m an evidence-based thinker, Cassandra, and what I’ve observed since I woke up 5 years ago after watching the must-see film JFK to 9/11 Everything is a Rich Man’s Trick by Francis Richard Conolly is that very, very few people are purely evidence-based thinkers. Most people are not ruthlessly evidence-based and will believe based on one or more of the categories below: — most things said by authorities — virtually nothing said by authorities — what accords with their values and beliefs — plausibility and implausibility — incredulity — what suits them or simply don’t care If I come up against something which challenges my credulity I do not reject it but give time to come round to it while others I think reject it out of hand. I know that anthropogenic climate change is not a hoax because the science explains quite clearly how it’s happening and the evidence… Read more »

Cassandra2
Cassandra2
Nov 11, 2019 5:53 PM
Reply to  Petra Liverani

We can at least be thankful for your last eleven words.

For a ruthlessly evidence-based researcher your analytical certainly evokes Dresden James’s last observation:

The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves.

Don’t worry, everybody is highly susceptible to ‘brain washing’; it’s just depressing to realise how good they are at it.

Ignore the performers on stage – take a look behind the curtain. Who’s behind it? How far back has it all been planned? What is the outcome objective? Refer to UN Agenda 21 for starters.

Tallulah
Tallulah
Nov 10, 2019 12:49 AM

They totally do fear us! Why else do ya think they go to so much trouble trying to deter us, delude us and discredit us. They think they’re losing the propaganda war. They just don’t want us to think so.

Betrayed planet
Betrayed planet
Nov 10, 2019 11:08 AM
Reply to  Tallulah

With respect they do not fear us in sufficient quantities to create change, at least not in the U.K. People fall like flies for the propaganda campaigns that will reduce many more to poverty or death in the event of a re-elected Tory regime.
People have their eyes wide bloody well shut, won’t see, can’t see.

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins
Nov 10, 2019 6:04 PM

B.P. , respectfully bro. HRC is shitting herself and even Bill is distancing himself from her: there is no question that she has broken the Law, multiple times & in many ways, and should have received a jail-term, which is why she and her Deep State Fascist Corporate Governors flood the media market with Trolls, not just from the 77th Brigade & especially in OffG columns BTL. Even James Comey is thinking of joining Kim Dotcom in New Zealand. If you then take into consideration the DNC’s choice of IT Guys, (the Awan brothers, one dead & one to go), who were physically removing servers, amongst other things, then the cumulative consequences start to compromise Every member of Congress & the Senate in fact, down to even their credit card numbers, being out ‘there’, at one point. The cover up of collective governMENTAL inefficiency & corruptibility is such an indictment… Read more »

mark
mark
Nov 8, 2019 11:01 PM

We have a corrupt and politicised “justice” system used for the purposes of intimidation and political persecution. Some people still believe in fairy stories like the Rule of Law and an independent judiciary.
What we are seeing now is no different from the Lula case in Brazil or any one of a thousand similar cases in authoritarian regimes. Upset the Deep State and you face selected targeted application of the law and the destruction of your life and future.

Jen
Jen
Nov 8, 2019 8:08 PM

Unfortunately what we don’t get in Lucy Komisar’s article, perhaps because of the peculiar quirks of the legal system in Britain that may include a great deal of secrecy about how aspects of it operate, is how Julian Assange came to have such a dubious legal representation with its various connections to Bill Browder and Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Who recommended Mishcon de Reya and other barristers to Assange and Wikileaks, and who is going to foot these barristers’ bills? Are there no other barristers specialising in human rights cases in Britain who can take on Assange’s case or was the case awarded to certain chambers in some kind of bidding arrangement or some other competitive arrangement? BTW it’s not unusual for law firms in Britain and Australia to have clients whose interests may be opposed, ie a law firm can represent both a company and a trade union whose members may… Read more »

R Heybroek
R Heybroek
Nov 8, 2019 8:08 PM

With respect, you can’t judge British law by US standards. Barristers are briefed by solicitors, not individual clients, and associate primarily in areas of competence, e.g. criminal, corporate or tax law. In their specialisation, they generally follow the ‘cab rank’ principle and accept briefs from prosecution or defence as they arise. It’s a strength of the system, not a problem.

Whatever I may think of some of the barristers in Matrix or Doughty, it would be foolish to assume that everyone in a chambers shares the same political views or attitudes. They do not. They argue like cats and dogs, usually with considerable professional respect.

I see nothing dubious about the range of experience of Assange’s legal team. If his solicitor thinks a barrister has a conflict of interest, he will withdraw the brief. I’d suggest you direct your enquiries to the instructing solicitor.

RobG
RobG
Nov 9, 2019 12:18 AM
Reply to  R Heybroek

Julian Assange was a dead man walking from the time he was taken (totally illegally) from the Ecuadorian embassy.

Just about all the Wikileaks team are now totally corrupted; and as this article points out, most of Assange’s legal team are also corrupted.

The alleged mental deterioration of Assange, combined with harsh (and totally unnecessary) prison conditions, might account for some of this.

Jen
Jen
Nov 9, 2019 4:28 AM
Reply to  R Heybroek

But surely it’s odd that at the same time he is representing Julian Assange against the US government, Mark Summers is also acting for the United States government in another case in which three British-based Credit Suisse bankers are fighting extradition to the US on charges of security fraud and money laundering?

Harry Stotle
Harry Stotle
Nov 9, 2019 9:33 AM
Reply to  Jen

And lets not forget the independence of the judge has been called into question.

Apparently the judge (Emma Arbuthnot) is married to Lord James Norwich Arbuthnot, a Conservative peer. Lord Arbuthnot was a Tory MP for 28 years and was chair of the Defence Select Committee between 2005 and 2014. He’s also a member of the advisory board of the Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies (RUSI). And he is chair of the advisory board of the UK division of multinational defence manufacturer Thales.
https://www.thecanary.co/uk/analysis/2019/06/17/assange-judge-refuses-to-step-down-despite-evidence-of-intelligence-and-defence-links/

It’s probably just a coincidence that a judge deeply enmeshed with Britains defence sector has been asked to preside over the case of a journalist who has demonstrated that the UK and US favour amoral foreign policies that offer wonderful profits for corporate shareholders, even the cost is invariably mass murder and wanton destruction of once beautiful towns and cities.

Betrayed planet
Betrayed planet
Nov 9, 2019 10:15 AM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

It is definitely no coincidence that Arbuthnot was chosen as presiding judge. Her husband has made a fortune out of armaments sales. She apparently from what I have read made no attempt whatsoever to hide her lack of impartiality.

R Heybroek
R Heybroek
Nov 10, 2019 3:21 AM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

Whether or not the judge(s) are biased is another matter. A conflict of interest would usually require that a judge recuse if their objectivity was called into question. But we don’t expect barristers to be impartial, we expect them to be as partial to our case as the law allows.

Tallulah
Tallulah
Nov 9, 2019 9:40 AM
Reply to  Jen

The feeling I get increasingly about the political world is one of unreality. It feels like the Truman Show. A piece of theatre whose performance of real life falls apart in close analysis.

Both sides of any alleged conflict are revealed as sharing friends, lawyers, social clubs. You get the feeling of a rep company going out drinking after the show, all pretend conflict put aside.

Is Julian even in that prison?Are Pilger and Murray just playing their own parts? Is this why they also don’t question the OBVIOUS anomalies?

I am starting to think we are duped way beyond our most ‘paranoid’ guess.

If Julian is real he is being used and let down even by his supposed supporters who clearly don’t give a toss about his wellbeing but just want him to suffer as some sort of symbol for their cause. So neither option here is good.

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 9, 2019 10:27 PM
Reply to  Tallulah

Julian is real – his physical and mental conditions are clear evidence.

His legal team is clearly indicated to be controlled opposition – if not all members at least some including Mark Summers.

The evidence shows Chelsea Manning is an intelligence asset and the Collateral Murder video is faked. https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/wikileaks-controlled-opposition.html

In my opinion, John Pilger is a gatekeeper who somehow blinds himself to obvious facts such as 9/11 being an inside job. In the case of Craig Murray he could be either controlled opposition – they’re capable of pushing out a lot of truth – or simply a gatekeeper like John Pilger.

Tallulah
Tallulah
Nov 9, 2019 11:07 PM
Reply to  Petra Liverani

Name one piece of hard evidence that JA is in that prison.

All we have is testimony from the very people you admit are probably controlled opposition. No one sees him in prison besides his lawyers and a few of the inner circle. All we know is he has appeared twice in court by video link (which is very abnormal and unexplained) and once apparently in person. Where he is the rest of the time is anyone’s guess.

There is something deeply wrong with this story. I suspect it is deeply deeply fake in some way, but I’m not sure in what way at this time.

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 10, 2019 12:39 AM
Reply to  Tallulah

When you say hard evidence I’m not sure what you expect. Obviously, lots of CCTV footage would show it but they’re not going to show us that. I lived next door to his father for 13 years and I know his demeanour indicates he’s pretty upset. As I say his obvious physical and mental state indicate it. My obsession is fakery and the two phenomena I’ve observed in every single instance without fail are that when they hoax us: — they give us signs and they give us lots of signs for Chelsea and the Collateral Murder video — they never fake any aspect so well that it can be used to defend their story. They are scrupulous in this unlike the logic applied by their critics and believers. Who knows? Perhaps they engineered it so Julian appeared in his motor cycle jacket to arouse suspicions. There are simply no… Read more »

Tallulah
Tallulah
Nov 10, 2019 9:18 AM
Reply to  Petra Liverani

So no reason to think the Julian thing is fake other than the fact Wikileaks was set up as a honeypot and has almost never produced any ‘leaks’ that seriously undermine the official story of the war on terror? Or the fact his legal team seem to be playing at defending him rather than actually doing it Or the fact he’s ‘supported’ by a bunch of B-list Hollywood celebs, washed up old journalists and ex-diplomats who seem more interested in using his name for self-promotion and establishing themselves as priests of the Church of Julian than making sure he has even basic amenities. Seriously it’s turned into a weird pseudo-Christian death cult. These people go on all the time about how he’s gonna die in prison. But his lawyers do nothing. And his supporters don’t even complain about their inaction! It’s obvious the scenario is mapped out. They’re waiting for… Read more »

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 10, 2019 10:03 AM
Reply to  Tallulah

Some supporters are making noises about his legal team. I think many others simply don’t follow that side and don’t understand it as I don’t myself but when I saw the 9/11 and post-9/11 hoaxes Mark Summers’ on CV I knew immediately he was controlled opposition. I’ve been trying to tell people for a few months now that Chelsea Manning is an agent and the Collateral Murder video is a fake and they simply won’t listen. It’s hard to know how seriously Wikileaks has been infiltrated which may explain lack of documents but I wouldn’t know.

Julian is not a fàke but he has made unwise decisions and trusted the wrong people.

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins
Nov 10, 2019 5:35 PM
Reply to  Petra Liverani

Good lord, ‘what a surprise’, you’ve changed your tune again. Not long ago, you accused Assange, Manning, Snowden, Binney & Wiebe of being controlled opposition, (your standpoint being controlled opposition, imho). So,
what happened to change your mind about Assange and do you still think that Binney & Wiebe are controlled opposition ? or is our Flaxgirl Jury still out to lunch, waiting for a shave, on that score . . . ?

You’ve made unwise decisions and trusted the wrong people, clearly. But don’t let that bother you, just try answering the question for once.

Have you researched “Parallel Platforms”, yet … ?
Because, until you understand about the computerised side of Military Intelligence, you have ground zero chance of comprehending everything else and where the missing $$$Trillions$$$ disappeared, the evidence of which was to be found in WTC7 & have a wild guess in which Pentagon Wing …

R Heybroek
R Heybroek
Nov 10, 2019 3:15 AM
Reply to  Jen

No, it isn’t. Barristers are instructed by solicitors, not (as a rule) end user clients. It would be like saying your accountant couldn’t work on tax reports for clients who are business competitors. In fact, as clients we want barristers (and accountants) with the greatest knowledge and ability to go to bat for us.

Jen
Jen
Nov 10, 2019 4:09 AM
Reply to  R Heybroek

But there is a possibility of a conflict of interest involved for Mark Summers in that he is acting for a client (Julian Assange) against another client (the United States government) in an extradition matter. The Bar Standards Board Handbook has this to say: A barrister must not accept instructions to act in a particular matter if: There is a conflict of interest between the barrister’s own personal interests and the interests of the prospective client in respect of the particular matter. There is a conflict of interest between the prospective client and one or more of the barrister’s former or existing clients in respect of the particular matter, unless all of the clients who have an interest in the particular matter give their informed consent to the barrister acting in such circumstances. Do we have any way of knowing if either Julian Assange or the US gave his/their informed… Read more »

Adrian @ J'Accuse
Adrian @ J'Accuse
Nov 10, 2019 6:29 AM
Reply to  Jen

Julian Assange is not so foolish as to be comfortable with his lawyer also representing the US gov. None of us should be. As for the US gov, they are in the catbird seat.

As for being enveloped by promoters of career conman, convicted tax-evader/fraudster, and US/UK state/intell ally Bill Browder and/or the Magnitsky hoax propaganda, no good’s to come of that, either.

In this court action, the most political of our time, these associations are wrong and should be eliminated.

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 10, 2019 7:25 AM

I’m afraid Julian and his genuine supporters have simply been too trusting. I asked why Mark Summers was chosen and was told simply that it was on the recommendation of Gareth Peirce. All I did was take one look at his CV to know he was controlled opposition because it showed he’d worked on the hoaxes, 9/11 and the post-9/11 anthrax attacks.

Adrian @ J'Accuse
Adrian @ J'Accuse
Nov 10, 2019 6:48 AM
Reply to  Jen

You raise a key question regarding Julian and informed consent – hopefully it will be answered.

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 10, 2019 3:24 AM
Reply to  R Heybroek

You wouldn’t work in the legal profession by any chance?

Regardless of the system these people are dodgy. I knew Mark Summers was controlled opposition the moment I looked at his CV and saw he worked on the 9/11 and post-9/11 anthrax attacks hoaxes.

https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/911.html

https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/anthrax-attacks-after-911.html

MLS
MLS
Nov 8, 2019 6:26 PM

An important subsidiary question becomes, why aren’t any of his high profile champions asking these questions? John Pilger? Craig Murray?

They all bang on about stuff like ‘torture’ but never point out that his lawyers totally fail to address this pretty darn crucial issue.

Craig Murray says ‘Julian has great lawyers’. Really? If we step back and think for a minute, does it honestly look that way?

They can’t even get him out of solitary or into a lower security prison.

Shit, they can’t even get his mail delivered adequately or uphold his right to get regular legal visitation!

And yet no one, not even his parents, are complaining about these failures!

And who is running Wikileaks these days? Do we have any way of being sure they aren’t just a co-opted shell?

Betrayed planet
Betrayed planet
Nov 8, 2019 6:48 PM
Reply to  MLS

To be fair Pilger is one of the few real supporters of Julian along with a handful of musicians. His lone voice is not enough. I saw a clip of Pilger crying after the recent spectacle of a so called hearing. The presiding judge, The Honorary Upyourbottom should have been in the dock for perjury, fraud, lying before a court and crimes against humanity.

LawStudent
LawStudent
Nov 8, 2019 6:13 PM

I’m a 2nd year law student and I can confirm that questions about the conduct of Assange’s defence are legion in my school. MNynpeople talking about the inexplicable lapses. Just s fee usdyes often discussed:

Why didn’t the defence take up the judge’s offer of bail application? To say ‘well they would lose’ is counter to the basics of juridprudence.

Why is there no complaint being lodged about his detention in a maximum security facility when he’s on remand – not serving a sentence – pending an extradition hearing?

Why don’t his lawyers lodge an appeal to the ECHR based on the testimony of the UN observers?

Why are his lawyers keeping such low media profiles?

It’s generally agreed something is very ‘off’ about this.

L Took
L Took
Nov 9, 2019 2:09 AM
Reply to  LawStudent

I think his lawyers stated that they were never offered a bail application, even though the judge claimed they had refused one. But I’m not sure; I had heard previous to this event that the lawyers would not ask because if they lost (the appeal?) Assange could be further punished for the loss. Is this accurate?

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins
Nov 10, 2019 8:45 AM
Reply to  LawStudent

Why don’t YOU go and perform a CITIZEN’S ARREST of that Judge Arbuthnot, for Not Recusing Herself ? Seriously, I studied law, too >>> just make sure you find the right police station, having researched by whom your accusations & charges will be processed, formally, i.e. there are good policemen out there, just believe me & in yourself.

Do I really have to haul my ass back to the UK and perform this simple step, on your behalf.
Where I am, is far more dangerous & complicated legally, within the most corrupted EU Justice system, where I’ve had to defy Judges and their threats, in Cyrillic . . .

Just do it, man, man up and kick ass …

MaryD
MaryD
Nov 8, 2019 5:56 PM

It may be relevant that one of Assange’s barristers also represents the corporate psyop Extinction Rebellion!

nottheonly1
nottheonly1
Nov 8, 2019 5:21 PM

Assange lawyers’ links to US govt & Bill Browder raises questionsThe network of lawyers in conflicting roles in Browder, Assange and US government cases raises questions about Julian Assange’s defense. Assange lawyers’ links to US govt & Bill Browder raises only one question: What the? I know it’s not comedy, because people get seriously hurt and killed as a result of the transformation of a more or less democratic government into a well organized criminal organization. Who better to run the courts, than the mob? Mob ‘Law’ enforcement included. So, organized crime owns everything. The big club. The biggest profits are made with stuff that was bought to blow up something. Or somebody. One could ask: ‘With links like these, who needs enemies?’ Anybody interfering into, or compromising the Mob execution of the owners’ plan, will be taken care of. Laws are written to owners’ demands and are quickly as… Read more »

Northern
Northern
Nov 8, 2019 5:14 PM

Good to see another article on this, seen several people raising concerns about these associations in independent media over the last few months, though it’s no doubt one of those things that will never be ‘officially’ addressed. Many people with more knowledge than I have questioned the wisdom of certain decisions his legal team have made (or not, as the case may be) in recent proceedings. Craig Murray’s account of Julian’s recent court appearance reads like something you’d expect from a country with ‘the people’s democratic republic’ in the name. On a tangentially related note, anybody reading this who has the impetus to write to Julian in support; The ‘writetoJulian’ website which appears at to the top of Google’s search results for those who google how to go about such a thing, is either accidentally or deliberately (one can probably guess which) mis-advising its readers of the requirements. The website… Read more »

Betrayed planet
Betrayed planet
Nov 8, 2019 5:21 PM
Reply to  Northern

Do you know his prison number?

Northern
Northern
Nov 8, 2019 5:30 PM

Ah, in a limited sliver of good news;
The aforementioned website seem to have cottoned on to their mistake after several people bringing it to their attention. They now advise you should include his number on all correspondence.

Mr Julian Assange
Prisoner #: A9379AY
HMP Belmarsh
Western Way
London SE28 0EB
UK

Betrayed planet
Betrayed planet
Nov 8, 2019 6:10 PM
Reply to  Northern

Thank you. Really appreciate that piece of info.

JudyJ
JudyJ
Nov 9, 2019 1:09 PM
Reply to  Northern

Northern

Courtesy of (if I recall correctly) a BTL contributor on Craig Murray’s blog, I checked out the HMP Belmarsh website which, reassuringly, instructs:

If you do not know the prisoner’s prison number, please address the envelope [as above] with the prisoner’s date of birth next to his name.

But something which may get overlooked is that it is a requirement that any correspondent must include their own name and address on the back of the envelope, or else the letter will not be delivered to the prisoner.

https://www.prisonadvice.org.uk/hmp-belmarsh

L Took
L Took
Nov 9, 2019 2:11 AM
Reply to  Northern

Then mine has been destroyed.

Betrayed planet
Betrayed planet
Nov 9, 2019 10:21 AM
Reply to  L Took

Keep writing, do not let these c*nts stop you. Write weekly and don’t stop. It’s all we have at the moment when so few are aware of the travesty of lack of democracy and justice.

Betrayed planet
Betrayed planet
Nov 8, 2019 5:06 PM

I have long suspected that Julian is not getting proper legal council. That his lawyers have not yet been able to get a proper hearing whilst he is left to rot in a maximum security prison is suspect in the extreme. The obvious Nazi style behaviour of the unlawful and fascist U.K. government and its lick spittle judiciary are apparent to all with absolutely no fight back from the excuse of a media nor indeed 99.9 percent of its compliant increasingly dumbed down and wilfully ignorant population. What is obvious now to anyone with half an eye open is that the U.K. is now a rogue state where law and justice are meaningless, where bribery and corruption are common place. That Julian Assange is slowly dying in front of the whole world, will die without some kind of major intervention is a stain on every single aware English resident. Mind… Read more »

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 8, 2019 5:50 PM

I know that Gareth Pierce recommended Mark Summers which raises a big question mark over her, doesn’t it?

Betrayed planet
Betrayed planet
Nov 8, 2019 6:16 PM
Reply to  Petra Liverani

Christ above, are there no decent lawyers out there to take on one of the biggest human rights abuses of our time? An abuse that will return to haunt us all.

tonyopmoc
tonyopmoc
Nov 8, 2019 5:02 PM

It’s all a media show, though I am reasonably well convinced that the Julian Assange story is mostly true. He may well have in the past worked for one or other Intelligence Agencies, and maybe still does. It is highly suspicious, that he never told the truth about 9/11, and his appearance a couple of years ago, in a motor cycle jacket, after a 6 hours wait, gave me the distinct impression that he had just arrived on the back of a motorbike. I mean why wear leathers???? It was a warm day, and he only had about 20 feet to walk if he had been there all the time. I know Pamela Anderson is an actress, but she looked very convincing to me, when she had just seen him banged up in Belmarsh. She was also very good on US TV. I find it hard to believe, that the… Read more »

nottheonly1
nottheonly1
Nov 9, 2019 12:52 AM
Reply to  tonyopmoc

For quite some time now, an odd possibility offers itself – theoretically. Julian Assange is not the messenger. He is the message. As a messenger, he is somewhat ineffective. He has not been able to convince people that the need for an uprising against lawlessness exists. That any form of government cannot work when the judiciary is corrupt and that there is no justice in a society ruled over by a regime. As a message however, he is in the eyes of masses of people. Probably a majority of humans on Earth know who Julian Assange is. How many know who he is, where he came from and what it was exactly he did, before he published videos showing how well the ‘Support our Troops’ deserve was used up in the way it was intended, can only be a guess. Or a dedicated team of statisticians to hold polls in… Read more »

JudyJ
JudyJ
Nov 9, 2019 1:38 PM
Reply to  tonyopmoc

Tony, 1. It is highly suspicious that he never told the truth about 9/11… You presumably mean that he never reported the truth about 9/11. He has always stressed that the raison d’etre of WikiLeaks is to publish information supplied to the organisation by others, and only after its veracity has been checked and double-checked. If no one has given him information on 9/11 for the purposes of publication by WikiLeaks, it is not his job to go looking for it. And information based on ‘suspicion’ isn’t suitable for publication. If a whistleblower came to him with definitive evidence of an inside job or cover up that would be a different matter, but presumably that hasn’t happened. 2. Ref the motorcycle jacket, the documentary film ‘Risk’ which followed Julian’s activities over several years included his ‘bail skipping’ exploits. It specifically showed him in the lead up to the quest for… Read more »

wiwer50923
wiwer50923
Nov 9, 2019 3:43 PM
Reply to  tonyopmoc

We can’t have this sort of stuff. If there is no suffering of a remote, persecuted personality on which they can latch redirected behaviour, then people might start to think about the injustice in their day to day lives. God forbid, they might even do something about it.
http://www.frombehindenemylines.org.uk/2019/04/notre-dame-assange-and-the-non-existent-skripal-ducks-alternative-media-does-its-thing/

John Thatcher
John Thatcher
Nov 8, 2019 3:50 PM

Thank you for the article.

Dungroanin
Dungroanin
Nov 8, 2019 3:13 PM

A fearless lawyer needs to come forward – a new Mansfield, Pearce or Khan – a modern Rumpole.

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 8, 2019 12:39 PM

I wonder if Alexander Perepilichnyy’s death happened any which way – if indeed he was even a real person – there’s only two photos of him as far as I can tell and the feeling of reality about his is not strong – as the Japan Times says, “What we know of Perepilichnyy is slight.” Could he have just conveniently been invented and disappeared somehow? The story of him spending his last night with his 22 year-old mistress (the good old 22) in Paris, complaining about his dinner, vomiting and then having his wife the next day in London prepare his favourite food, sorrel soup, for lunch then going out jogging somehow doesn’t ring true and we see a typical anomaly of faked stories, different versions: The Guardian: “was found outside his Surrey home” The Atlantic: “He collapsed on Granville Road, within 100 meters of the house he was renting”… Read more »

Rhys Jaggar
Rhys Jaggar
Nov 8, 2019 11:08 AM

Same story in UK sports reporting…corrupt industries raking in cash for unprincipled wordsmithery…

Rhys Jaggar
Rhys Jaggar
Nov 8, 2019 10:56 AM

Testing testing: if I say nothing, can my comment be posted?

Internet blockers are censoring me speaking truth unto power…

Frank Speaker
Frank Speaker
Nov 9, 2019 1:03 PM
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar

Don’t be so paranoid, or arrogant, you are not significant enough to be targeted for blocking.

crispy
crispy
Nov 9, 2019 2:33 PM
Reply to  Frank Speaker

I am though!

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins
Nov 10, 2019 8:19 AM
Reply to  crispy

Not significant enough, you mean: finally we agree, crispy.

DiggerUK
DiggerUK
Nov 8, 2019 10:36 AM

The defence team around Julian seems to be unfathomable at many levels.
My main concern has been over the unproved allegations of chemical torture made during his incarceration in Bellmarsh Prison.
Why has his defence team not asked for an independent medical assessment? Why have concerns not been raised with prison visitors who are allowed to investigate independently? https://www.imb.org.uk/independent-monitoring-boards/

Craig Murray who saw Julian on his last court appearance wrote of his condition….
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/10/assange-in-court/
……is it as a result of drugs used during interrogations, or is it down to mental trauma after what he has been through. Either way, his defence team and close friends need to up their game.

This article is not the first time that concerns have been raised in a worrying manner about the defence team around Julian…_

Rhys Jaggar
Rhys Jaggar
Nov 8, 2019 10:58 AM
Reply to  DiggerUK

It is a standard Uk tactic to have someone try to beat you up then publicly say what a friend of yours they are.

Happened to me four times: I called the lot of them out on it, something which gets them on their faux high horses very quickly…

Harry Stotle
Harry Stotle
Nov 8, 2019 10:09 AM

Amazing isn’t it, the way the legal system goes into hyperdrive pursuing those who expose war crimes while nonchantly turning a blind eye to those who commit them (no matter how high the body count). Harder to find a more glaring example of the way hypocrisy defines the elite’s relationship with things like morality, fairness or decency, not least because no western politician has ever been held to account for the havoc they have unleashed (in any court prosecuting war crimes). Ellen DeGeneres hi-fiving with George Bush. British MPs pretending a courageous whistle blower is not being tortured to death just a few miles from parliament. The one MP who did stand up for Assange has just been kicked out of Labour by the NEC. They should at least have the courage to make public the names of those who voted for Chris Williamson’s expulsion. https://labour.org.uk/about/how-we-work/national-executive-committee/whos-on-the-nec/ Needless to say the… Read more »

Rhys Jaggar
Rhys Jaggar
Nov 8, 2019 11:00 AM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

We are actually approaching apartheid South Africa in that regard, namely contempt for legal due process. Not quite had the Met coppers beating Assange over the head like SA cops did to Steve Biko, but we are slowly getting there…

Robbobbobin
Robbobbobin
Nov 9, 2019 12:44 AM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

Amazing isn’t it, the way the legal system goes into hyperdrive pursuing those who expose war crimes while nonchantly turning a blind eye to those who commit them (no matter how high the body count). As climate change is to massive environmental destruction well beyond the single parameter of temperature (for only one example: essential-adjuvant-added glyphosate is one of a multitude of other examples with other parameters) so–in the case of Julian Assange and many overlooked others persecuted for tilling the same soil—war crimes are to massive, apparently unrelated depredations of the social fabric far beyond the physical destruction wrought by bombs and mortars. Climate change and war crimes are easily identifiable rallying points of outrage that can externally fracture dissent as part of rendering that dissent powerless. Julian’s trials are not even primarily about the Iraq War Logs but about Wikileaks’ systematic, unrepentant, ongoing exposure of the icebergs of… Read more »

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 9, 2019 11:35 PM
Reply to  Robbobbobin

The evidence shows that Collateral Murder was faked. These are phenomena to bear in mind: — In order to infiltrate, intelligence agencies will push out things to show the power elite in a bad light. Does this make sense to you? Doesn’t sound too far out? After all, no one suffered any repercussions except Julian and allegedly Chelsea but the evidence for her shows otherwise. Obviously, if Chelsea feeds Wikileaks this very damning video with the little extra touch of it being encrypted it’s easy for her to have CREDIBILITY. Geddit? Also, they luuurve fooling us – you must never underestimate the satisfaction they get from that. This article shows that they’ve infiltrated legally so why not with the video? — We are profiled according to our values and our tendencies to believe and they FEED us accordingly. Does this make sense to you? They feed us both lies that… Read more »

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 9, 2019 11:53 PM
Reply to  Robbobbobin

Just to add: they may well have real footage of soldiers killing civilians but they would never show that on MSM as they showed Collateral Murder on ABC’s Nightline. No way because when it’s real it looks different. It really is truly awful. When they fake while it might seem real in the way a Hollywood movie seems real there’s a “sanitised” effect.

I cannot find a single image of a real victim of a bombing any more. A couple of years ago I could: the difference between a real and fake victim are utterly worlds apart. To see a real victim is beyond distressing.

Interview by Juju Chang with Chelsea Manning which shows snippets of Collateral Murder

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins
Nov 8, 2019 9:16 AM

Q: What do you call 100 Lawyers, chained together, fixed firmly to a 10 ton block of concrete,
at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean ?

A: A good start .. .

Cascadian
Cascadian
Nov 8, 2019 6:03 PM
Reply to  Tim Jenkins

How do you stop a lawyer from drowning?

Take your foot of his/her/it/?? head.

Robbobbobin
Robbobbobin
Nov 9, 2019 1:07 AM
Reply to  Tim Jenkins

A waste off resources. Keep the chains and concrete for something useful, add another 10,000 laywers (total 10,100) to deep, inescapable pits in large clear cut areas of former rzinforest to rot down and fertilize regeneration. Q: What do you call that? A: Not yet half done.

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins
Nov 10, 2019 8:28 AM
Reply to  Robbobbobin

Luuuuuuuuuula 🙂

Work in progress.

Coming soon ? Dependent on Bolsonaro’s Justice Minister getting a fair trial . . .
Can’t wait to read Glen GreenWald’s (forest) update 😉

universal
universal
Nov 8, 2019 8:35 AM

3 weeks ago, Assange made a court appearance where he appeared tortured mentally and physically.

At the precise moment, Australian newspapers blacked out their front pages in protest against secrecy laws.

Are these two events related? Did the government(s) impose a blackout on Assange’s court appearance news? If yes, couldn’t news agencies break this blackout because it is clearly illegitimate to disregard the basic human rights of an individual suffer from extreme deprivation of basic rights such as communicating with others, as well as having space to move outside?

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 8, 2019 9:06 AM
Reply to  universal

Are these two events related? Did the government(s) impose a blackout on Assange’s court appearance news?

Wouldn’t be in the least surprised.

Fair dinkum
Fair dinkum
Nov 8, 2019 9:42 AM
Reply to  universal

We don’t have any ‘Australian newspapers’ Uni.
What we have are advertising pamphlets for real estate, cars, investment services, trinkets and wine, with the occasional gossip column or political kiss arse piece.
Murdoch’s maggots have been feeding on the carcass of journalism for at least forty years.

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 8, 2019 10:34 AM
Reply to  Fair dinkum

… plus lots of fake stories, the latest one I noticed on Wednesday being a knife attack in St Peters. And who are its co-authors? Lucy Cormack and Josh Dye – whenever you see their names chances are, fake. Apart from the general implausibility, the generous signs of fakery they always provide us are capitalised below. https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/police-respond-to-stabbing-at-park-in-sydney-s-inner-west-20191106-p537ym.html Albert Metledge, 76, was killed while his son Antony, 33, was left with a knife sticking out of his back, after a labourer allegedly came at them on the site of a 90-unit residential development owned by the pair in St Peters. … On Wednesday evening a large manhunt was underway for the alleged attacker who quickly fled the site by HITCHING A RIDE to Brighton-Le-Sands. … He was last seen wearing a blue T-shirt, long blue work pants and brown work boots and MAY BE CARRYING A CONSTRUCTION HELMET AND A HIGH-VIS… Read more »

Jen
Jen
Nov 8, 2019 7:39 PM
Reply to  Petra Liverani

Did we also really need to know about the matriculation results of one of the victims and to know that the dead man’s neighbours came out in his defence, saying what a good fellow he’d been? On top of that, SMH readers are urged to reply directly to Josh Dye if they have information, rather than contact the police.

Why does the suspect’s Russian nationality need to be known?

That article is a very poor cut-n-paste job indeed.

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 11, 2019 1:07 AM
Reply to  Jen

Jen, there are issues wherever you look. In the Channel 9 video, the reporter says Albert’s name as “Albert Mertledge” but then correctly says the “Metledge family”. Not hard to get it right both times, is it? https://www.9news.com.au/national/st-peters-stabbing-police-operation-underway/d191d073-1451-4be9-b660-b448e83b6b9d In the SMH, a witness says there is blood everywhere but we see no obvious blood on Antony when he is wheeled off in the Channel 9 video. While the SMH says he “quickly fled the site by hitching a ride to Brighton-Le-Sands,” Channel 9 misspells the suburb and says: “It’s believed he managed to organise a lift to Brighton Le Sands following the attack. Police have spoken with the driver, who is cooperating with the investigation.” If they’ve already spoken to the driver why are they saying “believed”? But the story will come and go in a trice cos guess what? The alleged guilty person, Vladimir Kondakov, was found dead in… Read more »

universal
universal
Nov 8, 2019 2:56 PM
Reply to  Fair dinkum

Thanks Fair dinkum for the excellent description of the Australian press. Advertising panphlets indeed!

Jen
Jen
Nov 8, 2019 7:44 PM
Reply to  universal

Advertising pamphlets: understatement of the year. Australian newspapers are wall-2-wall sales catalogues. Take out the advertising and all you have left are traffic accident reports, Neighbourhood Watch stats and sports results.

universal
universal
Nov 8, 2019 11:35 PM
Reply to  Jen

Australian newspapers are wall-2-wall sales catalogues

Thanks for fine-tuning the definition of today’s press.
We need more like Fair dinkum and yourself!

Hope Kesselring
Hope Kesselring
Nov 8, 2019 7:05 AM

Good on you for bringing this up.

vexarb
vexarb
Nov 8, 2019 5:08 AM

As Willmers says below, nobody is allowed to question the wonderful superiority of the Home of the Brave, Land of the Free; hence its persecution of Truthers like Assange. Meanwhile, in the real world: “Chinese President Xi Jinping six years ago launched New Silk Roads, now better known as the Belt and Road Initiative, the largest, most ambitious, pan-Eurasian infrastructure project of the 21st century. Under the Trump administration, Belt and Road has been utterly demonized 24/7: a toxic cocktail of fear and doubt, with Beijing blamed for everything from plunging poor nations into a “debt trap” to evil designs of world domination. Now finally comes … a joint project of the US Overseas Private Investment Corporation, in partnership with Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Japan Bank for International Cooperation. But compare it [Blue Dot] with what just happened this same week at the inauguration of… Read more »

vexarb
vexarb
Nov 8, 2019 3:39 PM
Reply to  vexarb

PS And a gossamer report from UN likewise drifts in a direction that shows which way the big winds are blowing round the world. UNGA routinely condemns Uncle $cam’s economic blockade of brave little Cuba, but this time by 187 to 3 — only U$A, I$rael and Brazil opposed. It seems the U$A has been abandoned by former super power allies: Marshal Islands, Virgin islands and Madagascar.

mark
mark
Nov 8, 2019 10:53 PM
Reply to  vexarb

All the natives dancing around in grass skirts must have had a change of mind.
Maybe Uncle Sam was late with the glass beads to keep them happy.

Antonym
Antonym
Nov 8, 2019 5:06 AM

US government = the Swamp, not Trump. Funded by the 1%, which Trump could do without because of his own billions. Swamp’s old candidate HRC has 100x more financial links to Russia than Trump never had.

Cleaner Dem. candidate Bloomberg has China’s blessings; might get Andre Vltchek’s soon too here….

Wilmers31
Wilmers31
Nov 8, 2019 4:34 AM

I have read Browder’s book where he touches on the several ways the auctions were rigged and even makes a little mention of Khodorkovsky. Through various conversations with Russian emigrants I found out Khodorkovsky fed his bank with the IMF/BT/Enron money. People say he had his money from the Red Army but they only ‘guarded’ that money which was sent to Russia to take her over. Like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Libanon, and even Chile – realities refuse to obey planning. America cannot live without an enemy because the weapons industry would dry up. As Paul Warnke is quoted in a Gorbachev biography (Doder & Branson) now 25 years old. (Paul Warnke had been President Carter’s arms control chief):  “they cannot live without the Soviet threat. It’s been the dominant ruling element of their lives. If Gorbachev deprives them of an enemy, what can they do?”  Soviets gone, now Russia has… Read more »

Antonym
Antonym
Nov 8, 2019 4:56 AM
Reply to  Wilmers31

The US-1% doesn’t want to switch to China as an enemy because half of them make too much profit of it: prime example is Micheal Bloomberg, new canidate for… the Democrats who recently publicly defended President… Xi Jinping.

Rhys Jaggar
Rhys Jaggar
Nov 8, 2019 11:05 AM
Reply to  Wilmers31

Actual American freedom fighters could start blowing up US arms factories. That might break the logjam if they blew up a critical number of them…

Less inhumane than blowing up Californian dams, you know…..

Wilmers31
Wilmers31
Nov 9, 2019 5:12 AM
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar

No blowing up. That will only harden the other side – it’s below the belt and will harm the cause.

Don’t let them use you – don’t enlist.

It is prime season in Australia to rope in your youngsters. They talk of an F-35 as a Ferrari; arrange to blind the kids with dazzling tech on open days. They will at some stage understand that people do not want all that war kit when currently we have 600 submariners and nobody knows how to rope in 900 more for new boats. We want housing, and health, and …… bread and butter issues.

Germany and Britain also have recruitment problems – let’s exacerbate these. It’s slow, painful, and even expensive to let them make all these superfluous killing tools – but this must be our way.

Loverat
Loverat
Nov 8, 2019 3:47 AM

Mischon de Reya along with quite a few London law firms have been exposed in the past for trampling over the law and the rights of parties on the receiving end of their litigation.

I will never forget this case. Sadly rather typical in its day – poor judgement and quite possibly blinded by greed in pursuing cases that had absolutely merit.

It would be no surprise to see them on the wrong side over this.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/16/4_visit_libel_case_dismissed/

Petra Liverani
Petra Liverani
Nov 8, 2019 3:37 AM

Thank you, Lucy!

I said Mark Summers was controlled opposition myself knowing nothing of the connections above but it only took a look at his CV showing he worked on the transnational hoaxes, 9/11 and the post-9/11 anthrax attacks, to know that he was.

https://www.matrixlaw.co.uk/member/mark-summers/

https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/911.html
https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/anthrax-attacks-after-911.html