NYCFreeAssange hosted a celebration of the moment most of us barely dared to dream would come to honor so many who helped it happen and reflect on what next.
Best part was connecting my Assange event Jim to the radio voice and my first informed moment with Garland and Wilmer the other day. Expressive shots are favorites and overall aim to capture the spirit.. there are serious faced you too! <3
Thank you Pamela for recording our family album I will always treasure these times, these exceptional people I've met along the way. You are on the top of my list. Keep shooting, keep writing, keep marching in the streets.
I do not wish to diminish the importance (and sheer relief felt by all supporters) of Julian Assange reclaiming his freedom but --from what I understand, it came with a price -- of admission of guilt of which was the reason for his incarceration in the first place. In other words, he was made to admit to 'illegally' exposing documents that should be the public's right to know. (Am hoping one of your more erudite readers/analyst researchers picks up on what I am attempting to say and clarify,).
You are correct and at the event Joe Lauria summarized the conditions that technically set a precedent similar to UK's Official Secrets Act. Kevin Gozstola wrote about it in detail which is my best informed researcher source to expand on your point. :~)
Organized by Nathan Fuller and Vinnie De Stefano of Assange Defense, the celebration took place at the People’s Forum on Saturday night. The speakers, in order of appearance are:
Chuck Zlatkin, NYC Free Assange
Margaret Kunstler, attorney, lead plaintiff in Kunstler v. the Central Intelligence Agency
Margaret Kimberley, editor Black Agenda Report
Aaron Maté, journalist, The Grayzone
Katie Halper, host of The Katie Halper Show
Joe Lauria, editor, Consortium News
Jim Kavanagh, The Polemicist
Michael Smith, host of Law and Disorder Radio
Vinnie De Stefano, Assange Defense
Host: Nathan Fuller, director, Assange Defense
Note: Joe Lauria’s final remark, which was cut off on the video, pointed out that the U.S. knew it was going to lose on appeal in Assange’s extradition case because the Department of Justice could not give the High Court in London an assurance that Assange would be guaranteed a free speech defense at his trial.
I'm glad that Julian Assange is free but I've lost trust in him and WikiLeaks long ago.
Assange has downplayed looking into the 911 official story a couple of times, one on the show democracy now.
And I can't but help remembering the time where many of us were afraid of him being "killed by COVID" (or the jabs) while in jail. His team didn't seem to know that the whole thing was a scam. Heck, he had a stroke in jail, probably from the shots.
You would think WikiLeaks or his team would have had more knowledge about the shots and covid as they are not "normies" in terms of information. But nope, they went along with the covid story.... Hmmm
Always makes me scratch my head and get pretty annoyed when folks choose to put the obligation on WikiLeaks to produce documents & pursue stories that expose their cause de jour. Who cares that Assange ignores 9-11 when torture architect & war criminal Dick Cheney is endorsing a candidate nobody voted for? Get some geopolitical priorities.
In what rational model does a crowd funded transparency platform for whistleblowers apply scant funding that defends the digital infrastructure & data while fighting Uncle Sam to free their founder and publisher? Why should a research team at WikiLeaks shift from evidence of plots by CIA targeting WikiLeaks journalists and vetting troves of leaked unpublished documents to chase Covidian fraud?
Worse you want a victim of torture who was held in isolation without any computer access to rise as the voice of the public. It's a view that says you never bothered to scour the leaks for stories still untold but instead weaponize the importance of WikiLeaks as a public education tool to dump public ignorance in their lap. epic fail!
My point is that if they are indeed in the business of exposing the truth, why downplay 911 multiple times? Why not say that they're open to looking into it?
Keep in mind that Chomsky did the same with 911 and I'll be honest, it's either gatekeeping or cowardice.
I never said he needs to be the voice of the public. He had no access to information besides what his wife and his team had. Back when he had his stroke, I made a friend with someone who was close to his team. He and others were warning them about COVID possibly being used to kill him off. Wouldn't you be afraid if they were using it to kill people in hospitals everywhere?
I'm surprised that his team were oblivious to the clear COVID deception. It makes me wonder if they were playing politics or were they really clueless?
"My point is that if they are indeed in the business of exposing the truth, why downplay 911 multiple times? Why not say that they're open to looking into it? "
First I never guess what other folks think just look at their words and actions to show what is known. Next your premise is wrong they are not avengers hunting truth. WikiLeaks pioneered a platform to enable sources to submit evidence anonymously and then use their skills to vet those in the public interest for publication. If there were sufficient funding and source documents relating to Covidian frauds it's absolutely a topic that merits publication effort but they are NOT in the business of hunting for stories.
This is like the complaints by Hillary supporters that no equivalent to DNC emails was released about Trump. Find a source and submit the primary source documents and unlike corp media who will use that evidence to have you censored and prosecuted WikiLeaks will publish based on authenticity and public interest alone, political issues do not factor. They don't hunt for stories beyond those source documents put into their hands.
Thanks, Pamela. Great pics. You caught me ia nice WTF? pose.
Best part was connecting my Assange event Jim to the radio voice and my first informed moment with Garland and Wilmer the other day. Expressive shots are favorites and overall aim to capture the spirit.. there are serious faced you too! <3
https://www.flickr.com/photos/pameladrew/albums/72177720320518734/
Great. Thenks for the link.
Thank you Pamela for recording our family album I will always treasure these times, these exceptional people I've met along the way. You are on the top of my list. Keep shooting, keep writing, keep marching in the streets.
I do not wish to diminish the importance (and sheer relief felt by all supporters) of Julian Assange reclaiming his freedom but --from what I understand, it came with a price -- of admission of guilt of which was the reason for his incarceration in the first place. In other words, he was made to admit to 'illegally' exposing documents that should be the public's right to know. (Am hoping one of your more erudite readers/analyst researchers picks up on what I am attempting to say and clarify,).
You are correct and at the event Joe Lauria summarized the conditions that technically set a precedent similar to UK's Official Secrets Act. Kevin Gozstola wrote about it in detail which is my best informed researcher source to expand on your point. :~)
https://gosztola.substack.com/p/inside-the-assange-plea-deal-why
The link is much appreciated, PamelaDrew and does, indeed, complete/clarify the comment.
Consortium News video and summary of event ..
Organized by Nathan Fuller and Vinnie De Stefano of Assange Defense, the celebration took place at the People’s Forum on Saturday night. The speakers, in order of appearance are:
Chuck Zlatkin, NYC Free Assange
Margaret Kunstler, attorney, lead plaintiff in Kunstler v. the Central Intelligence Agency
Margaret Kimberley, editor Black Agenda Report
Aaron Maté, journalist, The Grayzone
Katie Halper, host of The Katie Halper Show
Joe Lauria, editor, Consortium News
Jim Kavanagh, The Polemicist
Michael Smith, host of Law and Disorder Radio
Vinnie De Stefano, Assange Defense
Host: Nathan Fuller, director, Assange Defense
Note: Joe Lauria’s final remark, which was cut off on the video, pointed out that the U.S. knew it was going to lose on appeal in Assange’s extradition case because the Department of Justice could not give the High Court in London an assurance that Assange would be guaranteed a free speech defense at his trial.
https://consortiumnews.com/2024/09/22/watch-new-york-celebrates-assanges-liberation/
I'm glad that Julian Assange is free but I've lost trust in him and WikiLeaks long ago.
Assange has downplayed looking into the 911 official story a couple of times, one on the show democracy now.
And I can't but help remembering the time where many of us were afraid of him being "killed by COVID" (or the jabs) while in jail. His team didn't seem to know that the whole thing was a scam. Heck, he had a stroke in jail, probably from the shots.
You would think WikiLeaks or his team would have had more knowledge about the shots and covid as they are not "normies" in terms of information. But nope, they went along with the covid story.... Hmmm
Always makes me scratch my head and get pretty annoyed when folks choose to put the obligation on WikiLeaks to produce documents & pursue stories that expose their cause de jour. Who cares that Assange ignores 9-11 when torture architect & war criminal Dick Cheney is endorsing a candidate nobody voted for? Get some geopolitical priorities.
In what rational model does a crowd funded transparency platform for whistleblowers apply scant funding that defends the digital infrastructure & data while fighting Uncle Sam to free their founder and publisher? Why should a research team at WikiLeaks shift from evidence of plots by CIA targeting WikiLeaks journalists and vetting troves of leaked unpublished documents to chase Covidian fraud?
Worse you want a victim of torture who was held in isolation without any computer access to rise as the voice of the public. It's a view that says you never bothered to scour the leaks for stories still untold but instead weaponize the importance of WikiLeaks as a public education tool to dump public ignorance in their lap. epic fail!
My point is that if they are indeed in the business of exposing the truth, why downplay 911 multiple times? Why not say that they're open to looking into it?
Keep in mind that Chomsky did the same with 911 and I'll be honest, it's either gatekeeping or cowardice.
I never said he needs to be the voice of the public. He had no access to information besides what his wife and his team had. Back when he had his stroke, I made a friend with someone who was close to his team. He and others were warning them about COVID possibly being used to kill him off. Wouldn't you be afraid if they were using it to kill people in hospitals everywhere?
I'm surprised that his team were oblivious to the clear COVID deception. It makes me wonder if they were playing politics or were they really clueless?
Epic fail x10
"My point is that if they are indeed in the business of exposing the truth, why downplay 911 multiple times? Why not say that they're open to looking into it? "
First I never guess what other folks think just look at their words and actions to show what is known. Next your premise is wrong they are not avengers hunting truth. WikiLeaks pioneered a platform to enable sources to submit evidence anonymously and then use their skills to vet those in the public interest for publication. If there were sufficient funding and source documents relating to Covidian frauds it's absolutely a topic that merits publication effort but they are NOT in the business of hunting for stories.
This is like the complaints by Hillary supporters that no equivalent to DNC emails was released about Trump. Find a source and submit the primary source documents and unlike corp media who will use that evidence to have you censored and prosecuted WikiLeaks will publish based on authenticity and public interest alone, political issues do not factor. They don't hunt for stories beyond those source documents put into their hands.