DN 16 June 2013, at the anniversary of Julian Assange political asylum, confined at the Ecuador Embassy by Sweden's design:
"Today’s whistle-blowers choose for their leaks rather other sites than a crippled WikiLeaks"
For
such conclusion the leading Swedish paper is quoting direct
declarations done to to DN by "WikiLeaks' contact-person in Sweden"
Prof. Christian Christensen, and also by the known anti-Assange
journalist David Leight.
And regarding Assange, who DN reports is “legally suspected of rape”, “there is no solution at sight whatsoever” (Ingen lösning i sikte för Assange), says
DN. These stabbings on the back of truth by Sweden establishment’s MSM
are done in the very moments that Ecuador’s Foreign Minister Patiño
starting the talks with UK authorities in London for just that purpose -
to find a solution to the deadlock produced BY SWEDEN with its
prestige-bound negative of interrogating Assange in London. Further, the
UK autorities as reported by BBC
quoting a Foreign Office spokesman, "remain committed to seeking a
diplomatic solution to this situation". The Swedish media campaign
appears as double fold unethical, for neither DN dare to publish the
complete reportage on-line for the general public, avoiding confronting
international rebuttal to the inaccuracies of Hall, Christiansen and
Leigh. Professors blogg reveals however the MSM plot here.
Analysis by Prof. Marcello Ferrada de Noli
DN First-page 16 June 2013: "Deadlock remains in the case Assange"
DN article: "Whitleblowers select other ways than WikiLeaks"
Journalist David Leight:
"We have not been in contact with WikiLeaks since three years. WikiLeaks has been since then practically out of the game"
Christian Christensen,
media professor at Stockholm University, and which according to the DN
reportage is "given by the WikiLeaks (official) site as contact-person
in Sweden" [http://wikileaks.org/Press.html#wsf]:
"WikiLeaks was before the only organization that could guarantee
anonymity and at the same time offer large spreading through cooperation
with various newspapers. Today there are several alternatives for leaks
(whistleblowers) in order to reach (the public) with their material"
a)
Quality of the material (in the sense of originality of the materials -
nearly unfiltered for reasons of protecting identities, etc., instead
of being redaction "reportages" based in information from those materials)
b)
Extension of the materials. The production available to the public at
the WL sites equates – to the best of my knowledge – the material at
disposition of WikiLeaks.
c) Free availability (public access) of the material beyond the readers or subscribers of the corporative MSM
d)
Most important ethical issue of all: WikiLeaks is NOT an instrument of
the power they exercise control upon. WikiLeaks exposes a system of
power-abuses in which many MSM have been a part of it.
Article "There is no solution at sight whatsoever”
Encircled text in green-blue:
"The facts, juridically: Suspected of Rape"
My comment about the "deadlock" at the Embassy ("There is no solution at sight whatsoever”)
Nominally,
the deadlock at the Embassy of Ecuador in London has been attributed to
the negative of the Swedish authorities to conduct an interrogation
with Julian Assange in London, directly in situ or by video-link - both
procedures contemplated as standard in the Swedish legal praxis.
However, the explicit political thesis presented in Professors blogg has been another. We have called the "Stalling hypothesis" and refers to:
As
far the “accusations-item” is concerned, Sweden has at-large
demonstrated it is NOT interested in ending the legal case. The only
interest Sweden has demonstrated is in trying to obtain the extradition
– by any means possible – of Assange to Sweden, where Assange would be
kept incommunicado-status behind bars as per standard legal procedure in
Sweden. The extradited-prisoner status of Assange (the status he would
have if taken prisoner to Sweden) enables other “juridical”
possibilities for Sweden, respective to USA, that were not accessible at
the time he would have been interrogated by the Swedish prosecutor when
he was free in Sweden. This situation may be one explanation why
Assange was led to understand he was “free to travel”.
The
Swedish legal extradition process against Assange, and the Swedish
legal process regarding the accusation “by the two women” against
Assange, are in the main two different things – and only euphemistically
connected. Those two different things have wrongly been mixed up in the
discussions around the “juridical case”. The synthesis of this
dialectics confirms conclusively that the Swedish “legal” case against
Assange is solely the political case of USA against WikiLeaks.
The
known homogeneity or “consensus” between the Swedish political parties
appears most visible in a) matters of foreign policy, b) issues of
“National security”, or c) any topic that might compromise the prestige
or trademarks of Sweden abroad. And we find the Assange case implicated
by the Swedish authorities in those three items altogether.
From Professors blogg article Timing the processes
--
Delaying Assange extradition-process for timing with process in the
U.S. On the possible reasons for the neglected interrogation of Julian
Assange and the verdict delays. On WikiLeaks and Democracy. Excerpts of
the RT Interview in Stockholm and excerpts regarding the "protracting
theses"
"In
the U.S., the preparations for these trials are seeking a connection
between WikiLeaks and Bradley Manning in terms of making Julian Assange
accountable; is that what they are apparently looking after. And for
that they need time. They need to prepare these materials. And for that,
of course, it is highly convenient to keep Assange under arrest – and
under the threat of the prospective of bring him here to Sweden, where
he later he might be subject to an extradition petition."
In the RT interview 'MSM blacks Assange as US seeks Manning link', gives a further rationale for the "protracted" legal process is discussed. The thesis on the protracted Swedish process aimed to benefit a timing with the U.S. processes against WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange, finds support in some items at the time line "United States v. Manning, Assange, WikiLeaks, and the Press" authored by Alexa D. O'Brien. Some issues in this inteview are referred in the RT article US needs Assange under arrest ‘while seeking Manning link’
In the RT interview 'MSM blacks Assange as US seeks Manning link', gives a further rationale for the "protracted" legal process is discussed. The thesis on the protracted Swedish process aimed to benefit a timing with the U.S. processes against WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange, finds support in some items at the time line "United States v. Manning, Assange, WikiLeaks, and the Press" authored by Alexa D. O'Brien. Some issues in this inteview are referred in the RT article US needs Assange under arrest ‘while seeking Manning link’
Excerpt:
RT -Julian
Assange, hailed as a hero for leaking information through his site
WikiLeaks, is facing an uncertain future. Swedish authorities want to
question him in relation to sexual assault allegations; and some
politicians in the U.S. want to extradite him there to stand trial for
leaking tens of thousands of secret US government documents. Here
discussing the on-going discussion surrounding Julian Assange is
Professor Marcello Vittorio Ferrada de Noli. Professor, thank you for
joining me. Moving straight on to Julian Assange, how do you put the
balance: Julian Assange is facing justice? Or this is a political
motivated assault on Julian Assange
Answer
Well,
I have my doubts about that (facing justice). Because even considering
the particularities of the Swedish legal system, Sweden would have also
the possibilities of for instance questioning Assange by other means; by
the phone, or by means of the Swedish Embassy in London, and so one and
so forth. I would be more inclined to think that here is a political
reason why this process has been put forward in he fashion it has been. I
would believe that the reason for the arrest order issued by Sweden is
to get WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange here into Swedish territory. By
being here in Swedish territory he would be then subject to further
extradition process in this case from Sweden to the U.S. I would believe
that the reason of this (mimicking quotation marks) “legal” situation
is more political. There is another strategy, in my opinion, behind the
all thing.
“Operation stalling”
The
external-caused, protracted asphyxiation process of WikiLeaks
(economically, politically, and in the organization structure)
apparently corresponds to a psychological-warfare design. I called it
“Operation stalling" [See "Swedish psychological warfare against Wikileaks and Assange"], as it aims appears to be the procrastination of the "legal" process and corresponding verdicts of extradition and the like.
While
the Swedish part had ample possibilities of arrange the interrogation
of Julian Assange already in Sweden, or even later while Assange was
under police custody or arrest in London, what we could witnessed is
instead an unnecessary or "constructed" delay. This procrastination
seemingly was a sine-qua-non element in the strategy of asphyxiate
Wikileaks economically; for the longer the process went on, the more
aggravating turned the funding situation cause by the Visa/Mastercard
transaction stop.
The
strategically political damage to WikiLeaks was in this design a)
partly to immobilize, delay or obstruct the analyses of materials and
editing, of for instance the so called cables-production, b) partly to
discourage the collaborative material would to be sent from the part of
the public to Wikileaks, based in the notion that these individuals
would wait until Wikileaks founder would be “clear” of any wrongdoing.
The
economic blockade aimed concomitantly to asphyxiate Wikileaks also
politically, as its political base and collaborative cadres, all of them
engaged only altruistically and ad-honorem, neither could endure such
long period, almost a year now. This situation also affects WikiLeaks
organizational functioning, as the longer the time the undefined process
persists, the more expensive the costs, and ultimately the totally
draining of such funds. Actually, this was pointed out by Julian Assange
long time ago, when in one of his appearance’s outside the court in the
previous hearings compared the enormous resources put up in this legal
process by Sweden, Britain or elsewhere, in contrast with the hyper
limited resources at his disposal.
No comments:
Post a Comment