Showing posts with label Assange. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Assange. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 08, 2024
Tuesday, June 25, 2024
Saturday, April 20, 2019
Ecuador President Lenin Moreno on revoking Julian Assange's asylum
At approx. 1:40 Mins. President of Ecuador LENIN Moreno mentions Julian Assange's last violation (while at his nation's Embassy in London) was when Wikileaks released Vatican Documents. That was the last straw...
Monday, November 07, 2016
Saturday, October 08, 2016
Julian Assange Confidential everyone in positions of government
Published on Oct 8, 2016
Economic collapse and financial crisis is rising any moment.
Getting informed about collapse and crisis may earn you, or prevent to lose money. Do you want to be informed just follow us in this channel.. Please click above to subscribe to my channel
SUBSCRIBE for Latest on FINANCIAL CRISIS / OIL PRICE / GLOBAL ECONOMIC COLLAPSE / AGENDA 21 / DOLLAR COLLAPSE / GOLD / SILVER / BITCOIN / GLOBAL RESET / NEW WORLD ORDER / ECONOMÝC COLLAPSE - .
Economic collapse and financial crisis is rising any moment.
Getting informed about collapse and crisis may earn you, or prevent to lose money. Do you want to be informed just follow us in this channel.. Please click above to subscribe to my channel
SUBSCRIBE for Latest on FINANCIAL CRISIS / OIL PRICE / GLOBAL ECONOMIC COLLAPSE / AGENDA 21 / DOLLAR COLLAPSE / GOLD / SILVER / BITCOIN / GLOBAL RESET / NEW WORLD ORDER / ECONOMÝC COLLAPSE - .
Sunday, July 31, 2016
Julian Assange : we have proof that the Clinton camp is rigging the elec...
Notice: Adjust volume because the audio is extremely low.
Wednesday, July 27, 2016
Assange Timed WikiLeaks Release of Democratic Emails to Harm Hillary Clinton
By CHARLIE SAVAGE
10 hrs ago
WASHINGTON — Six weeks before the anti-secrecy organization WikiLeaks published an archive of hacked Democratic National Committee emails ahead of the Democratic convention, the organization’s founder, Julian Assange, foreshadowed the release — and made it clear that he hoped to harm Hillary Clinton’s chances of winning the presidency.
Mr. Assange’s remarks in a June 12 interviewunderscored that for all the drama of the discord that the disclosures have sown among supporters of Bernie Sanders — and of the unproven speculation that the Russian government provided the hacked data to WikiLeaks in order to help Donald J. Trump — the disclosures are also the latest chapter in the long-running tale of Mr. Assange’s battles with the Obama administration.
Sign Up For NYT Now's Morning Briefing Newsletter
In the interview, Mr. Assange told a British television host, Robert Peston of the ITV network, that his organization had obtained “emails related to Hillary Clinton which are pending publication,” which he pronounced “great.” He also suggested that he not only opposed her candidacy on policy grounds, but also saw her as a personal foe.
At one point, Mr. Peston said: “Plainly, what you are saying, what you are publishing, hurts Hillary Clinton. Would you prefer Trump to be president?”
Mr. Assange replied that what Mr. Trump would do as president was “completely unpredictable.” By contrast, he thought it was predictable that Mrs. Clinton would wield power in two ways he found problematic.
First, citing his “personal perspective,” Mr. Assange accused Mrs. Clinton of having been among those pushing to indict him after WikiLeaks disseminated a quarter of a million diplomatic cables during her tenure as secretary of state.
“We do see her as a bit of a problem for freedom of the press more generally,” Mr. Assange said.
(The cables, along with archives of military documents, were leaked by Pvt. Chelsea Manning, then known as Bradley Manning, who is serving a 35-year prison sentence. WikiLeaks also provided the documents to news outlets, including The New York Times. Despite a criminal investigation into Mr. Assange, he has not been charged; the status of that investigation is murky.)
In addition, Mr. Assange criticized Mrs. Clinton for pushing to intervene in Libya in 2011 when Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi was cracking down on Arab Spring protesters; he said that the result of the NATO air war was Libya’s collapse into anarchy, enabling the Islamic State to flourish.
“She has a long history of being a liberal war hawk, and we presume she is going to proceed” with that approach if elected president, he said.
In February, Mr. Assange said in an essay that a vote for Mrs. Clinton to become president amounted to “a vote for endless, stupid war.”
Efforts to reach Mr. Assange for comment were unsuccessful, and a Clinton campaign spokesman did not respond to an inquiry. In November 2010, when WikiLeaks and its news media partners began publishing the cables, Mrs. Clinton strongly condemned it.
“In addition to endangering particular individuals, disclosures like these tear at the fabric of the proper function of responsible government,” she said then.
Mr. Assange’s remarks last month received only scattered attention, in part because in the interview Mr. Peston appeared to mistakenly assume that WikiLeaks had obtained still-undisclosed emails from the private server Mrs. Clinton had used while secretary of state and kept cutting Mr. Assange off to ask about it.
But it now seems clearer that Mr. Assange was trying to talk about the Democratic National Committee emails.
(The confusion stemmed in part because Mr. Assange said in the interview that WikiLeaks had “published” her State Department emails. But it made a copy of the ones the department posted on its website and made them easier to search.)
Mr. Assange spoke from the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, where he has been holed up for four years. Sweden is seeking his extradition for an investigation into sexual misconduct allegations; his supporters have expressed fear that if he is arrested, he could be sent to the United States and prosecuted for publishing leaked documents.
After the Democratic chairwoman, Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, resigned Monday when Sanders supporters reacted angrily to revelations in the emails that party officials had privately rooted for Mrs. Clinton to win the presidential nomination, Mr. Assange told the news program “Democracy Now!” that he timed their release to coincide with the Democratic convention.
“Often it’s the case that we have to do a lot of exploration and marketing of the material we publish ourselves to get a big political impact for it,” he said. “But in this case, we knew, because of the pending D.N.C., because of the degree of interest in the U.S. election, we didn’t need to establish partnerships with The New York Times or The Washington Post.”
Asked on that program whether the Russian government gave him the emails, Mr. Assange said he never reveals sources but also that “no one knows who our source is.” He also said the Democratic National Committee might have been hacked on multiple occasions by different intruders.
WASHINGTON — Six weeks before the anti-secrecy organization WikiLeaks published an archive of hacked Democratic National Committee emails ahead of the Democratic convention, the organization’s founder, Julian Assange, foreshadowed the release — and made it clear that he hoped to harm Hillary Clinton’s chances of winning the presidency.
Mr. Assange’s remarks in a June 12 interviewunderscored that for all the drama of the discord that the disclosures have sown among supporters of Bernie Sanders — and of the unproven speculation that the Russian government provided the hacked data to WikiLeaks in order to help Donald J. Trump — the disclosures are also the latest chapter in the long-running tale of Mr. Assange’s battles with the Obama administration.
Sign Up For NYT Now's Morning Briefing Newsletter
In the interview, Mr. Assange told a British television host, Robert Peston of the ITV network, that his organization had obtained “emails related to Hillary Clinton which are pending publication,” which he pronounced “great.” He also suggested that he not only opposed her candidacy on policy grounds, but also saw her as a personal foe.
At one point, Mr. Peston said: “Plainly, what you are saying, what you are publishing, hurts Hillary Clinton. Would you prefer Trump to be president?”
Mr. Assange replied that what Mr. Trump would do as president was “completely unpredictable.” By contrast, he thought it was predictable that Mrs. Clinton would wield power in two ways he found problematic.
First, citing his “personal perspective,” Mr. Assange accused Mrs. Clinton of having been among those pushing to indict him after WikiLeaks disseminated a quarter of a million diplomatic cables during her tenure as secretary of state.
“We do see her as a bit of a problem for freedom of the press more generally,” Mr. Assange said.
(The cables, along with archives of military documents, were leaked by Pvt. Chelsea Manning, then known as Bradley Manning, who is serving a 35-year prison sentence. WikiLeaks also provided the documents to news outlets, including The New York Times. Despite a criminal investigation into Mr. Assange, he has not been charged; the status of that investigation is murky.)
In addition, Mr. Assange criticized Mrs. Clinton for pushing to intervene in Libya in 2011 when Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi was cracking down on Arab Spring protesters; he said that the result of the NATO air war was Libya’s collapse into anarchy, enabling the Islamic State to flourish.
“She has a long history of being a liberal war hawk, and we presume she is going to proceed” with that approach if elected president, he said.
In February, Mr. Assange said in an essay that a vote for Mrs. Clinton to become president amounted to “a vote for endless, stupid war.”
Efforts to reach Mr. Assange for comment were unsuccessful, and a Clinton campaign spokesman did not respond to an inquiry. In November 2010, when WikiLeaks and its news media partners began publishing the cables, Mrs. Clinton strongly condemned it.
“In addition to endangering particular individuals, disclosures like these tear at the fabric of the proper function of responsible government,” she said then.
Mr. Assange’s remarks last month received only scattered attention, in part because in the interview Mr. Peston appeared to mistakenly assume that WikiLeaks had obtained still-undisclosed emails from the private server Mrs. Clinton had used while secretary of state and kept cutting Mr. Assange off to ask about it.
But it now seems clearer that Mr. Assange was trying to talk about the Democratic National Committee emails.
(The confusion stemmed in part because Mr. Assange said in the interview that WikiLeaks had “published” her State Department emails. But it made a copy of the ones the department posted on its website and made them easier to search.)
Mr. Assange spoke from the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, where he has been holed up for four years. Sweden is seeking his extradition for an investigation into sexual misconduct allegations; his supporters have expressed fear that if he is arrested, he could be sent to the United States and prosecuted for publishing leaked documents.
After the Democratic chairwoman, Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, resigned Monday when Sanders supporters reacted angrily to revelations in the emails that party officials had privately rooted for Mrs. Clinton to win the presidential nomination, Mr. Assange told the news program “Democracy Now!” that he timed their release to coincide with the Democratic convention.
“Often it’s the case that we have to do a lot of exploration and marketing of the material we publish ourselves to get a big political impact for it,” he said. “But in this case, we knew, because of the pending D.N.C., because of the degree of interest in the U.S. election, we didn’t need to establish partnerships with The New York Times or The Washington Post.”
Asked on that program whether the Russian government gave him the emails, Mr. Assange said he never reveals sources but also that “no one knows who our source is.” He also said the Democratic National Committee might have been hacked on multiple occasions by different intruders.
Source
Sunday, January 12, 2014
Vatican Secret Intelligence Network - Homeland Security - NSA - CIA Intelligence Gathering
.
666JESUIT666
Published on Apr 22, 2013
http://religiousmatrix.com/ The real Vatican Intelligence service will revealed here on this video. But here is the Vatican's official explanation for their Intelligence service. The Secretary for Relations with States is the foreign minister of the Holy See, an official serving within the Secretariat of State and presiding over its "Section for Relations with States." This ex officio archbishop deals with relations between the Holy See and other governments and international bodies and is assisted by a deputy called the Undersecretary for Relations with States.This Section began as the Congregation Super Negotiis Ecclesiasticis Regni Galliarum, set up by Pope Pius VI with the Constitution Sollicitudo Omnium Ecclesiarum of 28 May 1793, in order to deal with the problems which the French Revolution posed for the Church. In 1814, Pope Pius VII gave this office responsibility for the entire world and named it Congregatio Extraordinaria Praeposita Negotiis Ecclesiasticis Orbis Catholici. Some years later, Pope Leo XII changed its name to Congregatio Pro Negotiis Ecclesiasticis Extraordinariis, which remained its title until 1967 when Pope Paul VI separated this body from the Secretariat of State, calling it the Council for the Public Affairs of the Church. On 28 June 1988, Pope John Paul II promulgated the Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus, which created the present incarnation of the Secretariat of State. It was divided into the Section for General Affairs and the Section for Relations with States, which was the direct successor of the Council for the Public Affairs of the Church.
On the basis of Articles 45--47 of Pastor Bonus, the Section for Relations with States, sometimes known as the second section of the Secretariat, has the specific duty of attending to matters which involve civil governments. It has responsibility for the Holy See's diplomatic relations with sovereign states including such matters as the establishment of Concordats or similar agreements; the Holy See's presence in international organizations and conferences; the provision and modification, in special circumstances, of appointments to particular churches; and, in close collaboration with the Congregation for Bishops, the appointment of Bishops in countries which have entered into treaties or agreements with the Holy See.
This section is headed by an Archbishop, the Secretary for Relations with States, who is aided by a Prelate, the Undersecretary for Relations with States and various Cardinals and Bishops.
.
666JESUIT666
Published on Apr 22, 2013
http://religiousmatrix.com/ The real Vatican Intelligence service will revealed here on this video. But here is the Vatican's official explanation for their Intelligence service. The Secretary for Relations with States is the foreign minister of the Holy See, an official serving within the Secretariat of State and presiding over its "Section for Relations with States." This ex officio archbishop deals with relations between the Holy See and other governments and international bodies and is assisted by a deputy called the Undersecretary for Relations with States.This Section began as the Congregation Super Negotiis Ecclesiasticis Regni Galliarum, set up by Pope Pius VI with the Constitution Sollicitudo Omnium Ecclesiarum of 28 May 1793, in order to deal with the problems which the French Revolution posed for the Church. In 1814, Pope Pius VII gave this office responsibility for the entire world and named it Congregatio Extraordinaria Praeposita Negotiis Ecclesiasticis Orbis Catholici. Some years later, Pope Leo XII changed its name to Congregatio Pro Negotiis Ecclesiasticis Extraordinariis, which remained its title until 1967 when Pope Paul VI separated this body from the Secretariat of State, calling it the Council for the Public Affairs of the Church. On 28 June 1988, Pope John Paul II promulgated the Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus, which created the present incarnation of the Secretariat of State. It was divided into the Section for General Affairs and the Section for Relations with States, which was the direct successor of the Council for the Public Affairs of the Church.
On the basis of Articles 45--47 of Pastor Bonus, the Section for Relations with States, sometimes known as the second section of the Secretariat, has the specific duty of attending to matters which involve civil governments. It has responsibility for the Holy See's diplomatic relations with sovereign states including such matters as the establishment of Concordats or similar agreements; the Holy See's presence in international organizations and conferences; the provision and modification, in special circumstances, of appointments to particular churches; and, in close collaboration with the Congregation for Bishops, the appointment of Bishops in countries which have entered into treaties or agreements with the Holy See.
This section is headed by an Archbishop, the Secretary for Relations with States, who is aided by a Prelate, the Undersecretary for Relations with States and various Cardinals and Bishops.
.
Thursday, December 02, 2010
Media Ignore Gay Source for WikiLeaks
Photo (Courtesy) http://morrisonworldnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Wikileaks-founder-Julian-Assange-and-PFC-Bradley-Manning1.jpg
By Cliff Kincaid November 29, 2010
The issue is not just WikiLeaks and its strange founder Julian Assange but Bradley Manning and those in the Army who turned a blind eye to his alleged insubordination and treason.
As the Senate returns to Washington to debate such matters as the Pentagon’s homosexual exclusion policy, major media coverage of the disclosure of thousands of sensitive U.S. Government cables by WikiLeaks has curiously and conveniently ignored the homosexual orientation and anti-American motivation of the alleged leaker, Pfc. Bradley Manning, now in prison.
The New York Times reported, “The possibility that a large number of diplomatic cables might become public has been discussed in government and media circles since May. That was when, in an online chat, an Army intelligence analyst, Pfc. Bradley Manning, described having downloaded from a military computer system many classified documents, including ‘260,000 State Department cables from embassies and consulates all over the world.’ In an online discussion with Adrian Lamo, a computer hacker, Private Manning said he had delivered the cables and other documents to WikiLeaks.”
This is all true. But what the Times left out of its coverage was that Manning was an open homosexual who flaunted the Pentagon’s homosexual exclusion policy without being punished for his behavior and conduct.
Similarly, The Washington Post ignored the controversial issue of Manning’s sexual orientation. It reported, “Although WikiLeaks has not disclosed the source of the materials, suspicion has centered on Pfc. Bradley Manning, 23, an Army intelligence analyst now in military custody. The military arrested Manning this year, charging him with the downloading and transfer of classified material.” This was it.
Some honest coverage came from International Business Times, which reported, “Manning is openly gay and has been active in gay rights movements.”
But how was this possible if the Pentagon had a policy against gay soldiers?
Jonah Knox, the pseudonym for a noncommissioned officer and analyst in the United States Army Reserves, pointed out in an AIM column that, rather than repeal the Pentagon’s homosexual exclusion policy, the WikiLeaks scandal demonstrates that the policy and regulations need to be tightened up.
Knox wrote that the regulations implementing the policy seemed to be designed to cause confusion. Despite Manning’s flaunting of the law, Knox wrote, “it does not surprise me that the Army may never have investigated Manning for his support of the homosexual agenda, for his frequenting of homosexual events and/or establishments because Department of Defense policy does not seem to allow it. However, Department of Defense and Army regulations did allow the Army to investigate Manning based on his declarations of being a homosexual who despised the Army for not fully embracing the homosexual agenda and not acting quickly enough to repeal DADT.”
So the issue is not just WikiLeaks and its strange founder Julian Assange but Bradley Manning and those in the Army who turned a blind eye to his alleged insubordination and treason.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of the AIM Report and can be reached at cliff.kincaid@aim.org
Source
.
The issue is not just WikiLeaks and its strange founder Julian Assange but Bradley Manning and those in the Army who turned a blind eye to his alleged insubordination and treason.
As the Senate returns to Washington to debate such matters as the Pentagon’s homosexual exclusion policy, major media coverage of the disclosure of thousands of sensitive U.S. Government cables by WikiLeaks has curiously and conveniently ignored the homosexual orientation and anti-American motivation of the alleged leaker, Pfc. Bradley Manning, now in prison.
The New York Times reported, “The possibility that a large number of diplomatic cables might become public has been discussed in government and media circles since May. That was when, in an online chat, an Army intelligence analyst, Pfc. Bradley Manning, described having downloaded from a military computer system many classified documents, including ‘260,000 State Department cables from embassies and consulates all over the world.’ In an online discussion with Adrian Lamo, a computer hacker, Private Manning said he had delivered the cables and other documents to WikiLeaks.”
This is all true. But what the Times left out of its coverage was that Manning was an open homosexual who flaunted the Pentagon’s homosexual exclusion policy without being punished for his behavior and conduct.
Similarly, The Washington Post ignored the controversial issue of Manning’s sexual orientation. It reported, “Although WikiLeaks has not disclosed the source of the materials, suspicion has centered on Pfc. Bradley Manning, 23, an Army intelligence analyst now in military custody. The military arrested Manning this year, charging him with the downloading and transfer of classified material.” This was it.
Some honest coverage came from International Business Times, which reported, “Manning is openly gay and has been active in gay rights movements.”
But how was this possible if the Pentagon had a policy against gay soldiers?
Jonah Knox, the pseudonym for a noncommissioned officer and analyst in the United States Army Reserves, pointed out in an AIM column that, rather than repeal the Pentagon’s homosexual exclusion policy, the WikiLeaks scandal demonstrates that the policy and regulations need to be tightened up.
Knox wrote that the regulations implementing the policy seemed to be designed to cause confusion. Despite Manning’s flaunting of the law, Knox wrote, “it does not surprise me that the Army may never have investigated Manning for his support of the homosexual agenda, for his frequenting of homosexual events and/or establishments because Department of Defense policy does not seem to allow it. However, Department of Defense and Army regulations did allow the Army to investigate Manning based on his declarations of being a homosexual who despised the Army for not fully embracing the homosexual agenda and not acting quickly enough to repeal DADT.”
So the issue is not just WikiLeaks and its strange founder Julian Assange but Bradley Manning and those in the Army who turned a blind eye to his alleged insubordination and treason.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of the AIM Report and can be reached at cliff.kincaid@aim.org
Source
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)