The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewIsrael Shamir Archive
Julian in the Dock
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Julian Assange’s extradition hearing has had very little media coverage. Even The Guardian and The New York Times barely mentioned it, though these newspapers made a fortune publishing Assange-provided cables. Unless you had been looking for it, you wouldn’t even know that on February 24 to 27, the first stage of Assange’s extradition hearing was being adjudicated in the secretive Woolwich Crown Court embedded within the huge Belmarsh Prison nicknamed “British Gitmo”. Luckily for us, Ambassador Craig Murray, the indomitable truth fighter, went there, waited in line for hours in the rain, underwent searches and discomfort, and wrote an extensive report (12,000 words) on this travesty of justice that went under the name of a ‘trial’. His reports leave nothing out, from the threatening atmosphere to the sinister legal arguments. He captured the menace and the abuse bordering with public torture, and delivered it to the world, something that none of the journalists on the payroll of the mass media had been allowed to do. Here are some insights from his report in my free rendering augmented with other sources.

The Court is designed with no other purpose than to exclude the public, on an island accessible only through navigating a maze of dual carriageways, the entire location and architecture of the building is predicated on preventing public access. It is in truth just the sentencing wing of Belmarsh prison.

The judge, the Magistrate (or District Judge) Vanessa Baraitser is a modern version of the Hanging Judge George Jeffreys, a female Judge Dredd. She is the chief villain by all descriptions of the trial, not just tolerating but exceeding the demands of the prosecution. The lawyers acting for the prosecution did request some niceties if only for the trial to appear fair. Baraitser had no such pretensions. She went straight for the jugular. If she could, she would hang Assange right away.

This Jewish lady is surrounded by mystery: she has left no trace upon the Internet. A newly born child has more Internet presence than this middle-aged woman. I doubt such a blank slate could be achieved nowadays without the active assistance of the Secret Services.

Ambassador Murray writes: “Ms Baraitser is not fond of photography – she appears to be the only public figure in Western Europe with no photo on the internet. Indeed the average proprietor of a rural car wash has left more evidence of their existence and life history on the Internet than Vanessa Baraitser. Which is no crime on her part, but I suspect the expunging is not achieved without considerable effort. Somebody suggested to me she might be a hologram, but I think not. Holograms have more empathy.”

John Pilger saw Baraitser in action during the previous round of Assange hearings in October 2019. He wrote: “I have sat in many courtrooms and seen judges abuse their positions. This judge, Vanessa Baraitser shocked all of us who were there. Her face was a progression of sneers and imperious indifference; she addressed Julian with cruel arrogance. When Assange spoke, Baraitser contrived boredom; when the prosecuting barrister spoke, she was attentive. When Julian’s barrister described the CIA spying on him, she didn’t yawn, but her disinterest was as expressive. Her knee in the groin was to announce that the next court hearing would be at remote Woolwich, which adjoins Belmarsh Prison and has few seats for the public. This will ensure isolation and be as close to a secret trial as it’s possible to get.”

It turned out to be practically a secret trial. There were MSM journalists, but “not a single one of the most important facts and arguments today has been reported anywhere in the mainstream media.”

On the first day, James Lewis QC for the prosecution tried to drive a wedge between Assange and the media. He claimed that in no way are mainstream outlets like The Guardian and The New York Times threatened by this trial, because Assange was not charged with publishing the cables but only with publishing the names of informants, cultivating Manning and assisting him to attempt computer hacking. The mainstream outlets are not guilty of any crimes, having only published sanitised cables.

But Judge Baraitser didn’t accept this vegetarian approach. She thirsted for blood. She referred to the Official Secrets Act 1989, which declares that merely obtaining and publishing any government secret is an offence. Surely, Baraitser suggested, that meant that newspapers publishing the Manning leaks would be guilty of a serious offence?

Lewis agreed with the judge and admitted that indeed, the mainstream journalists also are guilty, fully denying what he said in his opening statement. In the end, none of this role-play mattered since none of the media reported on this exchange, as it wasn’t inserted into the daily press release. The MSM journalists used only these prepared texts, so convenient for copying and pasting into their own reports.

The main argument of the defence was that the motive for the prosecution was entirely political, and that political offences were specifically excluded under the UK/US extradition treaty. For a normal human judge, that would suffice to dismiss the case. But Baraitser had a trick up her sleeve. Although the US/UK Extradition Treaty forbade political extraditions, this was only the Treaty, and this is not an international court, she said. That exemption does not appear in the UK Extradition Act. Therefore political extradition is not illegal in the UK, as the Treaty has no legal force on her Court. With such a judge, who needs the prosecution?


The defence quickly demolished the judge’s devious rationalisations by pointing out that every extradition must satisfy two standards: (1) that of the UK Extradition Act, and (2) the specific Extradition Treaty with the country in question. Both are necessary; no man can be extradited to a specific country without consulting the specific treaty. The UK Extradition Act sets the ground rules. It is the relevant extradition treaty that sets out the conditions by which a prisoner might be extradited to a specific country. The Act allowed for a political extradition, and if the specific extradition treaty allowed it, the prisoner could be extradited. But this specific, namely US/UK extradition treaty does not permit political extraditions. Ergo, Assange could not be extradited by law.

Indeed a sixth-grade student could follow this simple logic. However, the dastardly Ms Baraitser kept repeating her claim that the Act does not forbid political extradition. We do not know what black spots hidden in the murky past of Judge Baraitser required that her history be blotted out by MI5’s dark adepts, but I harbour a suspicion that this Jewish lady has had some field practice in the Jewish state, where judges invariably find the accused goy liable and guilty, and every torture is tolerated or even encouraged.

Her main preoccupation seemed to be in arranging Julian’s suicide – or at least dishearten him to the point where his death by throttling might be explained away as suicide. He certainly seemed to be dispirited. The distinguished psychiatrist Professor Michael Kopelman provided a psychiatric assessment of Assange to the court:

“Mr Assange shows virtually all the risk factors which researchers from Oxford have described in prisoners who either suicide or make lethal attempts. … I am as confident as a psychiatrist can ever be that, if extradition to the United States were to become imminent, Mr Assange would find a way of suiciding.”

These words are especially poignant today, as it was reported that Manning attempted to commit suicide being locked up since last May at a detention centre in Alexandria, Va for steadfast refusal to bring evidence against Assange. The US/UK Deep State is a vengeful vicious beast that wants to punish Assange and Manning for revealing its nasty secrets. It is only the “whistle-blowers” who accused Trump and exonerated the Thief of Ukraine Biden that are protected.

In order to push Assange deeper into black despair, Baraitser enforced the regime of strict isolation on the prisoner. Assange had been kept in a bulletproof glass cage, unable to hear or to exchange notes with his lawyers. “I believe – wrote Craig Murray, – that the Hannibal Lecter style confinement of Assange, this intellectual computer geek, is a deliberate attempt to drive Julian to suicide.”

Julian is cruelly mistreated. When his Spanish lawyer left court to return home, on the way out he naturally stopped to shake hands with his client, proffering his fingers through the narrow slit in the glass cage. Assange half stood to take his lawyer’s hand. The two security guards in the cage with Assange immediately sprang up, putting hands on Julian and forcing him to sit down, preventing the handshake.

On the first day of trial, Julian had twice been stripped naked and searched, eleven times been handcuffed, and five times been locked up in different holding cells. The lawyer for the defence, Fitzgerald, asked the judge to interfere and save Julian from this rough mistreatment.

The Baraitser stared down Fitzgerald and stated, in a voice laced with disdain, that he had raised such matters before and she had always replied that she had no jurisdiction over the prison estate. You might make a recommendation, suggested Fitzgerald, they usually listen to judge’s remarks. Even the prosecution counsel James Lewis stood up to say the prosecution would also like Assange to have a fair hearing, and that he could confirm that what the defence were suggesting was normal practice. But bloodthirsty Baraitser flatly refused.

Edward Fitzgerald made a formal application for Julian to be allowed to sit beside his lawyers in the court. Julian was “a gentle, intellectual man” and not a terrorist. Baraitser replied that releasing Assange from the dock into the body of the court would mean he was released from custody. That is obviously nonsense. Again, the prosecution counsel James Lewis intervened on the side of the defence, for Baraitser’s notion of law would not work anywhere outside Israeli courts in the occupied West Bank. Lewis said that prisoners, even the most dangerous of terrorists, gave evidence from the witness box in the body of the court next to the lawyers and magistrate. In the High Court prisoners frequently sat with their lawyers in extradition hearings, in extreme cases of violent criminals handcuffed to a security officer.

Baraitser replied that Assange might pose a danger to the public. It was a question of health and safety. Health and safety, forsooth! Such cynicism may be unprecedented in British justice, and it should reserve a special place in hell for Ms Baraitser.

Why should she keep Assange in that box, unable to hear proceedings or instruct his lawyers, when even counsel for the US Government does not object to Assange openly sitting in the court? He is brought handcuffed and under heavy escort to and from his solitary cell to the armoured dock via an underground tunnel. In these circumstances, what possible need is there for him to be repeatedly strip- and cavity-searched? Why is he not permitted to shake hands or touch his lawyers through the slit in the armoured glass box?

It is a torture session, not a hearing. And the hearing, or rather the torture will continue in May, – if Julian is still alive.

Israel Shamir can be reached at [email protected]

This article was first published at The Unz Review.

Hide 97 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Dumbo says:

    Shameful. This one is for those who think that the West is the “land of freedom”.

    • Agree: Spanky, Tsar Nicholas
    • Replies: @Justsaying
  2. … for Baraitser’s notion of law would not work anywhere outside Israeli courts in the occupied West Bank.

    Cue “Jordan = Palestine” Sean’s skullduggery in 3 … 2 … 1 …

  3. Whatever her background, this tax-eating lickspittle would not be able to throw her weight around without the myriad Little Eichmanns who enable her and her ilk. (Little Eichmann gives them more credit that they’re worth: House Nigger is far better)

    It was not her who put their hands on JA when he tried to stand to thank his brief: it was two low-rent mouth-breathing shitbags whose identities should be stored and who should have night-time visits paid.

    They – and the badge-numbers who dragged JA out of the embassy – are perfect candidates for exemplary action designed to discourage House Niggers to abandon their posts. It is nearly time.


    This worked a treat in Egypt: a few dozen of Mubaraks’ worst street-level thugs (and their informants) were beaten with the type of vigour that they had previously displayed towards their work… and their colleagues were informed by broadcast e-mail “We know you are mukhabarat, and we know where you live.”

    That happened over two nights during the action that deposed Hosni-Hotep. Those two nights preceded the morning that the Egyptian security apparatus mysteriously stopped showing up for work.

    That morning, everyone knew Mubarak was finished. Without House Niggers, a ‘ruler’ can’t do a fucking thing. People who were previously too scared to go to Tahrir Square, were emboldened – and the crowd increased roughly 20-fold in 2 days. Two days after that, Mubarak he tried to prevent the inevitable by promising not to seek re-‘election’.

    Mubarak’s Interior Ministry had left a poorly-secured web-facing repository that contained a series of Excel workbooks (FFS!) containing personal details of mukhabarat staff and informants.


    This is the only way forward. The state’s House Niggers do not respond to anything except credible threats of personal violence – violence to them, personally, in their homes, away from their thugscrums.

    Imagine how much politer even the most stupid apparatchiki – say, TSA grope-tards – would be if they thought that people knew where they lived and that they would face violent, personal-level consequences if they went outside the lines.

  4. … if extradition to the United States were to become imminent, Mr Assange would find a way of suiciding.

    Let’s call it the Epstein Rule, a politically useful version of the Miranda Rule for dealing with problemmatic prisoners: “You have the right to suicide yourself. If you cannot find some way to suicide yourself, a suicide will be provided for you.”

    • LOL: animalogic
    • Replies: @Lot
    , @Biff
    , @Jane Doe
  5. I also concur with Kratoklastes, and think pictures of all of the prison thugs working the case, and the fascist judge should be published widely.

  6. Half-Jap says:

    Before any such thing happens, a significant portion of the public must be under sufficient personal pain and punishment. Otherwise, they shall remain oblivious, unfocused, looking the other way, etc.

  7. Lot says:
    @The Alarmist

    Here’s hoping Julian dies after many years of solitary in ADX Florence!

    Will you guys visit?

    No? Maybe he’ll make some friends, lots of big names: Unabomber Ted Kaczynski, shoe bomber Richard Reid, Oklahoma City bomber accomplice Terry Nichols, Olympic Park bomber Eric Rudolph, and Soviet spy Robert Hanssen.

  8. arrogant rulers never learn. by persecuting truth tellers or dissidents in order to punish or make examples of them, the rulers only succeed in turning them into martyrs. sick world will only get sicker, maybe literally now. hope Julian will turn to God in order to persevere. (Lord have mercy!)

  9. Biff says:
    @The Alarmist

    Let’s call it the Epstein Rule, a politically useful version of the Miranda Rule for dealing with problemmatic prisoners: “You have the right to suicide yourself. If you cannot find some way to suicide yourself, a suicide will be provided for you.”

    I almost gave that a LOL, but then I thought about it further, and found it not to be very funny at all. Brutally honest past the dark humor..

  10. Sean says:

    Manning attempted to commit suicide being locked up since last May at a detention centre in Alexandria, Va for steadfast refusal to bring evidence against Assange.

    Now freed, Manning does not threaten to commit suicide through tame psychiatrists she makes serious attempts to do. it Manning also takes testifying on oath seriously, but knows very well that–were she to tell the truth—Assange would be exposed as having been engaged in espionage.

    Moreover, Assange broke a public commitment to surrender if Manning was pardoned. If Assange had surrendered when Manning was originally released he would not have got into the DNC emails and the GRU, which is the real reason why is why the US establishment hate him.S Seth Rich is dead so Assange failing to unambiguous say Rich was the the DNC hacker and Wikileaks source for the DNC emails indicates Rich was surely not the source.

    Assange dupes women or men with a feminine cast of mind like Manning, who Assange not only failed to give meaningful support to, but by continuing the release of data that from mannin after Manning had been arrested placed Manning in extreme danger of being held for decades.

    Had it been Rich then Wikileaks sources still alive (and Assange) would be in much more danger from the example of those who killed Rich being able to liquidate a Wikileaks whistleblower. Rich was murdered then it was suggested he was DNC hacker, Yet if that is what happened Assange would be screaming from the rooftops that Rich was his DNC email source, and providing proof for the contention

    Assange is accused of agreeing to show Manning how to break passwords into the secure US government system he stole US secrets from. If Assange had not done that then Manning would surely be happy to talk about how Assange never made an agreement to help Manning. Assange absconded from bail, he brought the treatment he is getting on himself.

  11. JasonT says:

    So you think that the punishment for ‘bail jumping’ should be solitary confinement and torture? Assange has already served the sentence he received for ‘bail jumping’, yet he is still in a maximum security prison being tortured.

  12. @Sean

    You could appy to be the judge of such trials. You don’t seem to be very different from the one that is judging presently the case of J.A. in the UK.

    What is astonishing in his case is the high number of attempts to get one judicial sentence favourable to him in the last 10 years without any success. He lost practically everything. The case in Sweden was dropped only when it was clear that it wasn’t useful anymore. The present judge is really frightening. How can we imagine her privately dealing with other people around her? Such a callouness, lack of empathy, lawlessness travested as law is shocking.

    What you say, Sean, is not enlightening in any way. Manning had the courage to do what he did and to take responsibility for it, even in a process that wasn’t very fair and after suffering what was considered torture. Manning and J.A. haven’t turned against each other. The democratic emails aren’t the reason why J.A, is hated. Years before the case of the emails, justice backed by the security establishment was already after him and the hate against him was obvious. Manning didn’t need any help from J.A. to get the material that he got simply because he was authorised to have access to it without having to hack anything. By the way, it wasn’t really top secret material as potentially a very high number of people had access to it.

    • Replies: @Sean
  13. I didn’t know the bitch was Jewish, thanks for letting on. I believe her husband makes his shilling in the armament industry.
    Also, the names and id’s of five S.o.B’s carrying Julian out of the Ecuadorian Embassy should be outed.

  14. Dumbo says:

    It’s “funny” that this is happening exactly at the same time that the only news outside is coronavirus, nobody even hears about it, and Assange was a quasi-celebrity until no long ago, for a while at least.

    This coronavirus scare is being used as cover for a lot of things, I bet. (some murky Wall Street deals probably as well)

  15. Is it possible that the career history of this judge is hidden because she was brought to the bench for this issue alone? Is she an actual judge, with an actual career history? The rulings she has made appear to be of the kind that a person with no experience with the law would make.

    What judge would stubbornly rule that an extradition act contains an exception that can’t be found in the article itself, and over the disagreement of both the defense and the prosecution?

    • Replies: @Parfois1
    , @Parfois1
  16. CamFree says:

    Clearly, there’s war on truth. What have the bastards got to hide? They’re acting like Assange could bring the entire Anglo-American-Zionist house of cards crashing down if he was given just a few well-chosen words to declare in public.

  17. Sean says:

    Manning would not be refusing to talk if he could truthfully tell the Grand Jury that Assange did not agree to help Manning get steal data.

    Assange continued to release the stolen data he got from Manning (some for all he know potentially a death warrant for US collaborators) after Manning was arrested, thereby greatly increasing the fury of the US and the damming case against Manning. Yet Assange was too busy raking in plaudits, sex and the contributions (as a charity) to provide significant legal or financial support for Manning.

    After almost dying in a suicide attempt, Manning is released, but now owes a quarter million dollar fine for not talking. Assange has from the begining adopted a policy of silence in court, he is trying the old Asperger’s trick which worked for a couple of hacker that the UK refused to extradite. But they were British, and kept their word to honour the conditions of their bail and not let down those who stood surety for him. Assange leaves those woolly headed people who trust him with their life saving forfeit or needing a HIV test.

    The difference between the secretiveness of Manning and that of Assange is clear: Manning keeps quiet to protect others at cost to himself, while Assange simply does not care about other people.

  18. jonswift says:

    Me thinks you should reveal your affiliation with the U.S. military/intelligence complex.
    Sorry, forget that, you just did by your comments, how stupid of me.

    • Replies: @Sean
  19. jonswift says:

    I did not know Vanessa Baraitser was a jew. The WSWS never mentioned it in their condemnation of her actions as a judge in their coverage of the Assange show trial. It’s been almost 2000 years, and it seems that Judas has returned.

    • Replies: @Just Passing Through
  20. Sean says:

    The Swedish women were CIA were they?

    Britain refused to extradite Gary McKinnon even though he was a 9/11 Truther and left threatening messages in the secret US government system he hacked into. Why should the UK annoy America for an Australian, especially as Assange was not some pathetic Aspie UFO nerd, he was a self styled ‘spy for the people’ enjoying a rock star lifestyle.

    Australia had its fun with the Spycatcher case over there, Peter Wright’s lawyer became prime minister and the Austrians rejoiced at see the British state humiliated. No one in Britain is going to be sad to see the freeloading Aussie L.Ron leave in chains for a few years at Club Fed. Actually, what was he doing in Britain in the first place?

    • Replies: @Alfred
  21. Pft says:

    “The Act allowed for a political extradition, and if the specific extradition treaty allowed it, the prisoner could be extradited. But this specific, namely US/UK extradition treaty does not permit political extraditions. Ergo, Assange could not be extradited by law.”

    I don’t follow the logic. It says the ACT allows it but the Treaty does not. As such by UK law its allowed, but the treaty says not . So its the Treaty that prevents extradition, unless of course the 2 parties of the Treaty waive this, which apparently they have.

    • Replies: @Parfois1
  22. Was the system used in the Stalinist purges as low and vicious as English common law has now proved itself to be?

  23. I think Gilad Atzmon avoids criticizing rabbis because he is quite afraid of them. And rightly so. But maybe it is the female jews that are the most cruel and fearsome? Kinda like my sister. Just a thought.

    In any case Judge Vanessa Baraitser should be forced to take a polygraph test to determine her allegiance and competence to handle this case. And more media should be covering the case to point out the cruelty of the setting and the manifold travesties of the whole circus.

    Fact remains, Trump I Love Wikileaks praised Wikileaks in no small way. Julian Assange should be free and given a high post, like to run the Federal Communications Commission to CLEAN HOUSE and return the air waves to the people, stop this one dollar — one vote selling election ads nonsense, etc. etc.

  24. @Sean

    No non-American should be extradited to the US and certainly not for something down outside the US in a country where it was not a felony. The injustice being attempted by the US is a match for US crimes that Wikileaks revealed.

    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
    , @Sean
  25. @Sean

    Why does the prosecution need Manning’s evidence? And if it can’t prove that Manning was instructed by Arrange in how to crack computer codes why would her fear telling a grand jury that Arrange didn’t show him how?

    The theoretical possibility suggests itself that Arrange was extremely careful and, while knowing that Manning had access to US military computers merely gave him instruction in how to go about cracking the codes of computers generally so that he could deny that it was more than helping someone to do something not necessarily illegal.

  26. Alfred says:

    This is entirely correct. The only way this fake judge can be cut down to size is by removing the protection afforded by the “house niggers”. Every tyranny is ultimately dependent on a handful of these hateful and cowardly people. They are far fewer than one would imagine.

    The photo of those policemen gleefully stuffing Assange into a van outside the embassy is embossed on my brain. I am sure it would be very easy to locate them.

  27. Israeli resident Israel Shamir, usually quite astute, is oddly intent on ignoring most key facts about Assange, such as the time when Israel’s PM Bibi Netanyahu boasted to Israeli media, that Assange was an Israeli-Mossad asset shielding Israel in his ‘leaks’

    Media are minimally covering the Assange hearings, because all major media know what all major governments know – the unfortunate truth about the pro-Israel, anti-9-11-truth Assange –

    Whom Zbig Brzezinski admitted was publishing ‘Wikileaks’ seeded from the intelligence agencies themselves

    Who has benefited from Rothschild family lawyers, Rothschild relatives posting his bail, Assange ‘wiki-leaking’ to destroy Rothschild rival bank Julius Baer

    Whose victims trusting Assange have turned up dead, such as Peter W Smith, Assange even claiming he ‘never got’ the poor dead guy’s files … Assange lawyer John Jones thrown under a train and killed before he could expose Assange was never really ‘living in the London Ecuador embassy’ etc aside from photo ops

    Assange who won’t use the USA Virginia federal judge bribery files that have helped stop other extraditions, and which would make his own extradition impossible

    Who was sold to the world by oily Assange-pumping CIA-tied media who quite ignore or abuse real dissidents … people are just too eager to have a CIA-supplied ‘hero’, not realising it is all a scam, articles like this by fact-ignoring-Shamir not helping matters

    • Replies: @Johnny Walker Read
  28. @Kratoklastes

    Very interesting, indeed. To topple something, work bottom upward, rather than top down…

  29. @Lot

    Here’s hoping you share the fate of your namesake.

    • Agree: Antiwar7
    • Replies: @WHAT
  30. Parfois1 says:

    Me thinks you should reveal your affiliation with the U.S. military/intelligence complex.
    Sorry, forget that, you just did by your comments, how stupid of me.

    Probably you are not a frequent commenter here. That person (or algorithm) is in fact a well-known shill for the Establishment.

    Very observant of you to notice his credentials in such a short exchange. There are a few of that ilk round here.

  31. Caruthers says:

    Assange cares about the public good, which is why he helped reveal to the public the misdeeds of the selfish and evil powers-that-be, misdeeds which those powers wanted concealed so they could remain unaccountable to the public that they lyingly profess to serve.
    The persecutors of Assange disregard the public good, which is why they contemptuously reject in advance any “public good” defense for the public revelation of “classified” proofs of their iniquity.
    The persecution of Assange was transparently political from the outset, with Swedish women pressured into filing dubious accusations later retracted, Swedish prosecutors refusing the routine practice of traveling abroad to take depositions and refusing to guarantee there will be no extradition to America, British judges ignoring British extradition laws in their fanatical zeal to destroy Assange, British courts holding hearings as secretively as possible, MSM outlets colluding with the states whose asses they kiss by declining to report accurately on the trial, etc.

    • Agree: Nonny Mouse, Parfois1
  32. Alfred says:

    enjoying a rock star lifestyle

    In the Ecuadorian Embassy for 7 years?

    I always thought you were a troll. Thank you for confirming it. 🙂

    You are not only a troll but you are utterly despicable.

  33. Parfois1 says:
    @Twodees Partain

    Is she an actual judge, with an actual career history? The rulings she has made appear to be of the kind that a person with no experience with the law would make.

    From what I deduced from a Murray’s report of the proceedings regarding access by Assange to his lawyers at the hearing, she is not familiar with the conduct of a trial or, alternatively, is following instructions from above or is viciously wicked. She deemed the release of Assange from the dock and sit with the defence team to be a release from custody. That is patently wrong. The presiding magistrate in court is the supreme authority in the conduct of the case and everything else within the courtroom itself. If Julian were allowed to sit with his lawyers he would still be in custody under her authority, apart from the fact that he would be surrounded by the guards and handcuffed. She’s a nasty piece – as bad as her supporter Sean.

    The verdict is a fait accomplit of course and I suppose there is going to be an appeal. That being the case, perhaps it is a godsend that the magistrate, by her nastiness, gives the defence another ground for the appeal for failing the basic rule of fairness and impartiality. Yes, it is doubtful she is a normal member of the bench.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  34. Jane Doe says:
    @The Alarmist

    Ha! You could take up where Kurt Vonnegut left off! Brilliant post.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  35. WHAT says:

    Unz will never ban a coethnic, by the way.

  36. @jonswift

    I can’t find any information that confirms the judge is a Jewess. Of course it is likely impossible to find some biography of her in which she recounts her days at the local synagogue, but I would be interested to know if ther are any other people with the surname ‘Baraitser’ who are confirmed Jews.

    • Replies: @Gidoutahere
    , @lysias
  37. Parfois1 says:

    I don’t follow the logic. It says the ACT allows it but the Treaty does not. As such by UK law its allowed, but the treaty says not . So its the Treaty that prevents extradition, unless of course the 2 parties of the Treaty waive this, which apparently they have.

    I am not familiar with the Act or the Treaty. I believe that there is an Extradition Act for general application and this Act incorporates the specific provisions of all Treaties with the countries concerned. So, instead of having an Extradition Act for every Treaty with every country, it is customary and more convenient to make the treaties part of a single Act.

    That appears to be the case here and why the defence argues that point. You are right that the Act takes precedence over the Treaty because a Treaty is not part of domestic law until approved by parliament. In some jurisdictions international treaties are automatically part of the national law. So, if the same legislative mechanism applies here, and the Treaty UK/US prevents extradition, that is the law and Assange cannot be sent to the US gallows. Of course he has to establish that the prosecution’s case is political as well.

  38. Bartolo says:

    I am disgusted. Some people claim Trump might give him a pardon. Is this true or wishful thinking?

  39. Parfois1 says:
    @Twodees Partain

    After writing the comment above #34 it suddenly occurred to me that the conduct of the dictator/magistrate is wrong, irrational and demonstrative of the dictator’s unfamiliarity with court proceedings.

    Let’s assume Julian Assange appeared in person (no legal representation). In that case he would not be confined to the dock but sitting as of right at the bar table, writing notes, perusing documents and even moving about if needed.

    • Agree: Twodees Partain
  40. @Brabantian

    This level of truth is not appreciated by most “round here”. Personally, I love it.

  41. @Kratoklastes

    Whatever her background, this tax-eating lickspittle would not be able to throw her weight around without the myriad Little Eichmanns who enable her and her ilk. (Little Eichmann gives them more credit that they’re worth: House Nigger is far better)

    Excellent description. Hannah Arendt’s “banality of evil” is on full display here.

  42. Jake says:

    This stuff is not new to English justice; it’s not remotely close to being the next thing to new. And with starting with the dawn of the 19th century, it slowly became clear by the timer of Disraeli that all the earlier such machinations – those used to destroy unrepentant Catholics and the Celts and those citizens of England allied with them against the evils of London, as well as those who favored true monarchy – were leading to the fulfillment of of the cultural fruits of the Judaizing heresy Anglo-Saxon Puritanism. And that is that Jews were revealed to wield controlling power over the British Empire at its largest.

    WASP Empire is Anglo-Jewish Empire. It cannot be other, because of the inherent fruits of Judaizing heresy becoming deep culture of the nation it overcomes.

    We all today are nothing better two things in the eyes of the Elites of the Anglo-Zionist Empire: we are Palestinians before Netanyahu and we are Irish Catholics before Cromwell.

    It can get worse from here, and it will always be a threat to get worse as long s WASP culture reigns. Every tree produces fruit after its kind. WASP culture produces fruit after the kind of Judazing heresy.

    • Replies: @Oscar Peterson
    , @Lot
    , @Parfois1
  43. @Sean

    Absolute nonsense.

    Assange set up an organization to which leakers internationally could send information that they thought should be publicized.

    If there had been big leaks from Russia or China in the early days of Wikileaks, Assange would have been hailed as a hero of free speech and transparency. But what happened instead is that the big leaks came from employees of DoD and the IC in the US, young Americans who thought the USG was in violation of the “norms and values” it preaches and on which they had been brought up. (The story of the millennial leakers is an interesting piece all by itself.)

    So the US political and media class then launched into one of its patented binges of vindictive hypocrisy and decided that this Australian national working outside the US should be subject to domestic US law like the Espionage Act. A trumped-up rape charge was ginned up in submissive Sweden with the help of two witless female “activists.” When Assange tried to save himself from this setup, the lapdog HMG in the UK then did its Kafkaesque best to Airstrip-One itself into the good graces of American Weltreich.

    Eventually, after hiring Spanish companies to spy on Assange in his Ecuadorean embassy refuge and then using blackmail to compel the new and servile Ecuadorean government to hand him over, he was dumped in Belmarsh to be treated as though he were something out of Silence of the Lambs.

    Since the application of the Espionage Act is rather dicey–at least until the US can get its greedy paws on him–the prosecutors are now leading with technicalities about Manning’s access to US Siprnet computers. The truth of the matter is that the US produces lots of alienated youth, some of whom it then hires to do sensitive work for it. The issue for the USG (leaving aside what it should do about the substance of the skullduggery revealed by Wikileaks) is to fix its own security systems and figure out why young Americans are inclined to reveal its dirty laundry via a journalist like Assange to the world.

    But that’s not the way the Empire works, of course. The whole thing is an absolute travesty of justice. And, as Shamir notes, the media that published the stuff Wikileaks revealed, is now, in true Orwellian fashion, pretending that the whole thing doesn’t exist (and meanwhile whining about how Orwellian China has become.)

    One can only wonder how “the West” became so disgusting. Personally, I attribute a lot of it to the disgusting Jewification of the US which has lent a paranoid, mendacious, aggressively hypocritical, Jewy cast to the whole culture.

    Just disgusting!

    • Agree: Tsar Nicholas, Parfois1
  44. @Lot

    You and the Jewess, Baraitser–two repulsive Jews of a kind.

  45. @Lot

    Funny you forgot Jonathon Pollard. The secrets he spilled must be so immense that no president has yet served his Israeli master, and released the spying schmuck. Thinking about that just makes me realize what a joke the Assange charges really are. Naturally such a joke in clown world means lock him up and throw away the key if the Brits (Jews?) don’t kill him first. Sad.

  46. One can empathize with Assange for the treatment in his captivity but one feels more sorry for the Englishman for he has been truly turned into a faggot, who is ruled by a cabal represented by this Jewess, whose infamous forebear had also prostituted herself to an unkosher king in order to give her people a leg up by having untold numbers murdered. Surely, another holiday is due to be added to the Hebrew calendar to honor the modern Esther!

    • Agree: Twodees Partain
    • Replies: @Oscar Peterson
  47. Agent76 says:

    Feb 17, 2020 Australian MPs lobby Britain to release Wikileaks founder Julian Assange

    In less than a week, the US government will begin arguing for his extradition on espionage charges. Two Australian MPs lobbying for Assange to be released will meet him in prison tomorrow.

  48. @Really No Shit


    Who’s baking the Juliantaschen?

    And in modern Jew style, instead of slaughtering all his children, they lock him away forever so he won’t have any.

    You’re quite right about the Brits. What a sad fate for a once-great nation.

    • Agree: thotmonger
  49. @Jake

    So how do you explain the fact that the Anglo-Saxon subjection of the Celts, to which you refer, took place a millennium before the advent of the “Judaizing heresy”?

    • Replies: @Jake
  50. Poor Julian. Meanwhile no crucial questions about Jeff Epstein.

  51. Jake says:
    @Oscar Peterson

    So you think that in approximately the year 1600 (which would be a late date for for seeing the Anglo-Saxon Puritanism as having risen to major power), there had been 1000 years since all things Celtic in the British Isles had been eradicated? No Celtic languages, no Celtic folklore that defines culture, no Celtic senses of identity?

    What you mean is that you are able to conceive of culture only in terms of centralized powers that come to rule via successful warring. Such a view would mean that once the Elites in control of London had come to control Ireland or Scotland, for example, there would be only English culture operating in Ireland and Scotland.

    And that is absurd.

    Plus, the total subjugation of all parts of the British Isles to London occurred only with the 17th century. It was the specific culture that was formed out of the English Reformation that was fired most by its Judaizing take on Calvinism (Anglo-Saxon Puritanism) that, in its secularized forms at least as fiercely as in its early theological form, acted to eradicate everything that could be a basis for rejecting it. And the enemies it hated most and feared most were things that were, or were seen as related to and amenable to, Catholic and Celtic.

    WASP culture is direct, rather immediate, fruit of a Judaizing heresy. And once those archetypal WASPs gained control of London, they did what made perfect sense based on their theology: they, led by the definitive archetypal WASP Oliver Cromwell, allied with Jews to make Jews their international bankers.

    Either you favor that, which means you need to accept that what we have around us today is inherent fruit of it and therefore you accept this horror story of Anglo-Zionist Empire as a good, or else you accept that that WASP culture was always a perversion of Medieval English culture, which means you accept that the things that WASP culture has acted to destroy (anywhere, not just in the British Isles) were morally and culturally preferable to the Judaizing culture of WASPs.

    • Replies: @Oscar Peterson
  52. @Sean

    I will put this up front. I have long believed that Assange is not what he appears to be. That said, I believe you are making a lot of assumptions.
    Let’s start with the Grand Jury itself. The Grand Jury is supposed to be charged with the task of determining the relevance of the evidence, and asking those questions pertinent to the case. These days, is assembled to indict and is manipulated by the prosecutors in order to gain indictments. An exception to that was the decision to present all of the evidence in the Michael Brown shooting, which resulted in the media “facts” being demolished. In the case of the Oklahoma City bombings, Grand Juror Hoppy Heidelberg was tossed because he went public with his notion that Patrick Ryan was manipulating the Grand Jury away from evidence. There is no reason to believe that the Grand Jurors dealing with Assange’s charges are not being manipulated. I suggest that it is more likely that Manning understands this perfectly well, and is not prepared to be part of a Kangaroo Court.
    The case in Sweden was bogus from the start. There was never any “rape”. Both women acknowledged the intercourse was consensual. One wanted Assange to be tested for HIV, and the other complained that the condom broke. The prosecution turned that into “rape”. When the woman, who requested Assange be tested, learned of the rape charge, she withdrew her request, which was done long before Assange “jumped bail”. The condom produced by the other “accuser” had no trace of Assange’s DNA. This was known before the Swedish prosecutors met with Assange in the Embassy, and there is some evidence that it was known before the extradition request was made. In short, there was no crime. A fraud was committed on the UK, by the Swedish prosecution services, yet the charade carried on for a decade with the full co-operation of the UK government.
    This is about stopping leaks, nothing else. This is the point Kractoklastes makes in Post #3. It’s the House Niggers ganging up on Assange because he has crossed an invisible line. Assange’s treatment is the warning to all others.

  53. @Just Passing Through

    She has big nose, something like Barbara Streisand or Golda Meier. Just trying to helpful, ya know.

  54. Charles says:

    If you have a blog there are people here who would be interested in reading it.

  55. @Jake

    I said nothing about “eradication.” The word I used was “subjugation.”

    You’re right that that even subjugation was not completed across the entire British Isles until later. I guess I was thinking of England in particular.

    But it’s the start point of the Anglo-Saxon invasion that’s more important than its conclusion. The point is that aggressive Germanic moves (Anglo-Saxons, Franks, Lombards, et al) into southern and Western Europe were independent of the Reformation. So any attempt to treat Anglo-Saxon aggression as a concomitant of Puritan aggression seems to be on shaky ground unless one can demonstrate something in the Anglo-Saxon character that predisposes it (but not, say, the Franks) a priori to “Puritanism.”

  56. Lot says:

    No greater Englishman!

    • Replies: @Zarathustra
  57. Whenever I encounter or read about any hero or crusader wanna-be ‘truth-teller’ I ask a very simple litmus test question:

    Does he or she ever directly finger or criticize Israel, zionism or jewish power?

    If the answer is “no”, he or she has failed the ‘smell test’, and that person will be viewed with suspicion, although not dismissed out of hand. Some voices are well aware of the ‘third rail’ that must never be touched, and dance around the issues by never naming directly ‘those who may not be criticized’ to insure their voice continues to be heard. Pepe Escobar comes immediately to mind as one who obviously knows the score, but navigates successfully around the shoals of ‘anti-semitism’. It’s frustrating, but understandable.

    Right from the get-go with Assange it seemed to me he was not nailing any Team Zionist entities. And when I heard he was not supportive of the 9/11 truth movement, it became clear that while he did put forth some very helpful materials, he was either self-censoring, or worse, when it came to Tribal intrigues.

    I want to believe Assange is a hero who simply stayed away from the ‘third rail’ so often fatal to journalists, in order to keep himself in a position to be accepted by MSM outlets where a wide audience could be reached with the information Wikileaks tries to get out into the public realm.

    But even if that is so, the take-away to journalists must be: you can kiss all the Z-team butt you want and shield Tribal interests all you can. But that is no guarantee that when you find yourself with your tit firmly in the political ringer that any of their mouthpieces in the MSM will lift a single finger to help you out or take your side. Because in dealing with the Tribe it is always a simple give-and-take relationship.

    You give and they will take (until you are no longer needed or useful.)

    Mr Assange is finding this out the hard, hard way, and maybe that is why they keep him isolated and incommunicado……

  58. MikePToo says:

    Well, there’s really not much to say about JA. Whether he is a (((CIA))) asset or not, he has certainly been severely screwed over

  59. Trump’s betrayal of Assange might be the worst thing he’s done, aside from refusing to defend his own supporters in general.

    • Agree: Twodees Partain
  60. @Wizard of Oz

    No non-American should be extradited to the US and certainly not for something down outside the US in a country where it was not a felony.

    I am not an admirer of Assange and some of what he did seems highly questionable. But you have nailed it in one. The British Government is aiding American attempts at extra-territoriality and Universal Jurisdiction. It is bad for Britain and the World and must be stopped.

    PS: There have been times in the past when you have sounded like the Obfuscator of Oz, but this was a Wiz contribution. Keep it up !

  61. JamesinNM says:

    If there are any attorneys at law who desire to be real attorneys rather than part of the maritime system of the City of London, please rise up collectively against this false judge who has no jurisdiction over any living human being and demand she be removed and prosecuted in a true court of justice.

  62. lysias says:

    Manning was never pardoned.

    • Replies: @Sean
  63. lysias says:
    @Just Passing Through

    Michael and Marion Baraitser are both members of Jews for Justice for Palestinians. Google it.

    • Thanks: Just Passing Through
  64. @lysias

    The judge’s name is Vanessa Baraitser.

  65. MLK says:

    With all due respect, I think you’re being a bit of a chump.

    Obama commuted Manning’s sentence just days before leaving office. While the case had been incendiary, all the usual suspects in CIA etc. were strangely uncomplaining.

    And I guess it’s just a coincidence that the term’s of the commutation provided for a four month release delay, to the exact day that Mueller was appointed Special Counsel, May 17, 2017.

    I’m not going to reinvent the wheel for you because I doubt there’s any chance you’ll figure out that you’re a useful idiot for Brennan and the other filth attempting then and still to bring down Trump.

    Suffice it to say that they had a number of frame-up gambits centered around Assange.

    • Replies: @Sean
  66. bjondo says:

    Jew for Justice for Palestinians

    These sort of “helpful” Jew kiss of death.

    Better they stay home and spin chickens.

    5 dancing shlomos

  67. Sean says:

    Your point is purely technical. Even a full presidential pardon does not wipe out the conviction so it is not the same thing as being acquitted. Manning was granted clemency and let out with 27 years of his sentence still to serve.

    If Obama grants Manning clemency, Assange will agree to US prison in exchange

    That is what Assange said through Wikileaks’s Twitter account and let stand–until it happened, whereupon he backed out. Assange is a 6’2” weasel.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  68. Iris says:

    You are one sick POS.

    I have read thousands of comments from you Hasbara, but you still manage to surprise me.

    You rejoice at human beings being “punished” in a barbarian, medieval way? What a sick POS you are. How do you manage to live within society, with such a schizophrenic discrepancy between your “human” exterior mask and your inner Satanic filth?

    • Replies: @Lot
  69. @Dumbo

    We have been conditioned for so long to believe that kangaroo courts belonged exclusively to shithole countries, that when they are actually held under our very noses, we fail to notice them. The for-profit Main Shit Media cannot be expected to cover secretive hearings that don’t yield millions of dollars in profits.

  70. Lot says:

    Wrong! It is you Islamic jihadis who engage in barbaric criminal punishment. Saudi Arabia beheads people, Iran hangs teenagers for being gay and has “religious police” that beat up women on the street.

    When Assange is deported to the USA, he will be protected by our Constitution even though he’s obviously guilty.

    There’s an argument we Americans are too kind to criminal scum like Assange, but we’re a kind people and nation.

    Of course he won’t be tortured! Not here, not in the UK.

    Cruel and unusual punishment is not allowed here.

    If he really does suffer from his claimed “clinical depression” then he can get treatment for it at ADX Florence Supermax Prison.

    • LOL: AnonStarter
    • Replies: @Anonymous
  71. Hodd says:

    The level of ignorance shown here by commentators is unbelievable.
    A look at the London Evening Standard, London’s local evening paper, will tell you the presiding judge sits in courts in London frequently. While her ‘reported behaviour’ by the liberal reporters used by the alternative media might be questionable, her general court behaviour outside the Assange case is generally correct.
    It is common knowledge that Assange works for a group of Israeli Jews currently out of favour with tptb. Initially, to prove his worth to this Jewish community, he hacked the computer system of the British National Party, a legally constituted British political party registered with the Electoral Commission. Assange published the names, addresses and personal details of the entire membership of the party. This is not the action of a man who has the interests of a subjugated people at heart, but rather the action of a man who hates the people of a nation in the control of the Jews.
    Assange is a fraud and you are all suckers for thinking he is helping the people against the State. You lot, including Shamir, are what is known as ‘useful idiots.’ This court battle is actually a power struggle between one group of Jewish oligarchs and another group of Jewish oligarchs for who controls Israel, the UK (drug money laundering City of London) and the US (CIA drug transporting service) that you ignorantly think is controlled by Rothschilds.
    No true British Nationalist sheds a tear for traitor Assange since he only serves a faction of the Jewish dictators of the world.
    None of you, including the writer of the article, the reporter and commentators have a clue about what you are writing. Not even the idiots who think they are part of the Establishment. Not one person here has a clue what they think they know, and yet if any of you were able to do even basic fundamental on line research you would know that what is written in this comment is touching the edges of the world where you are all economic slaves to the Jews, or what is passed off as Jewish these days, bearing in mind that even the government of Israel publicly admits that only 2% of Israeli Jews are actually Semitic…
    You are all truly useful idiots, and if you weren’t so utterly brain dead, you’d know it too!

    • Replies: @Iris
  72. Sean says:
    11 August 2010
    Julian Assange arrives in Sweden on a speaking trip partly arranged by “Miss A”, a member of the Christian Association of Social Democrats. He has not met “Miss A” before but reports suggest they have arranged in advance that he can stay at her apartment while she is out of town for a few days.

    14 August 2010
    “Miss A” and Mr Assange attend a seminar by the Social Democrats’ Brotherhood Movement on “War and the role of media”, at which the Wikileaks founder is the key speaker. The two reportedly have sex that night.

    17 August 2010
    Mr Assange reportedly has sex with a woman he met at the seminar on 14 August, identified as “Miss W”.

    18 August 2010
    Mr Assange applies for a residence permit to live and work in Sweden.

  73. @Parfois1

    Yes, she gives the appearance of someone playing a role for which she is unprepared. If the object is to present a verdict allowing extradition, in defiance of the applicable law, it might not be surprising if the next step is to claim that there is no appeal to her verdict.

    • Replies: @Parfois1
  74. @Sean

    You have to be kidding. With his little mate Manning being screwed mercilessly for showing up US criminality he made a contribution aimed to help get him a pardon. And having seen what had been done to Manning and many other victims of US justice – and reading what Congressmen and others were calling for against Arrange – you really expect him to submit? [I’m also inclined to think he would have worded his promise carefully to give him an out].
    Can you say your sense of honor would have ensured that you surrendered yourself?

    BTW my convict ancestor who was given a pardon by the Governor of New South Wales had his offence wiped out as if never convicted. That is my recollection of the Common Law way.

    • Replies: @Sean
  75. Iris says:

    The US prison system is barbarian by formally-agreed European standards, period.

    Us, Europeans, have abolished the death penalty in our countries and do NOT extradite to countries who still execute inmates.

    If this sad, bottle-bleached clown Boris Johnson was not owned lock, stock and barrels by his Zionist pimps, we would not even be having this surreal discussion.

    • Replies: @Parfois1
  76. @Lot

    Cromwell was Welsh ; you know!

  77. Anybody can tell me the difference between this (democratic) trial, or Nazi people trials, or as a matter of fact Bolshevik trial?
    And why MSM does not tell the truth that there are are good whistle blowers, and bad whistle blowers? Good whistle blowers do not have to even identify themselves like that Colonel, in Trump’s

  78. Sean says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Julian used ‘clemency’ rather than ‘pardon’ so the argument has nothing to do with the case.

    [I’m also inclined to think he would have worded his promise carefully to give him an out].

    Check the words used, and if Julian let them stand as a statement by him for an extended period of time. I think you will find it is as I said.

    Manning got into physical altercations with his fellow soldiers and his superior recommended he not he not be allowed to carry a sidearm. I think he has a thing about authority, but would be truthful in sworn testimony; he could get out of his troubles by testifying and surely would if it would help Assange. In contrast there is no one’s welfare that Assange puts before his own personal aggrandizement, as could be seen at every stage of this affair in retrospect.

    Can you say your sense of honor would have ensured that you surrendered yourself?

    None can say what they would do when it came to it, but I would have only have undertaken to do such a thing with a real intent to fulfill the obligation at the time I made the commitment. It seems to me that Assange made the public offer to surrender if Manning was released with an eye to advantage for Assange. There is a pattern here. If well meaning people of modest means offered surety while not actually having that amount of cash in the bank, then I would not have absconded from bail leaving them with no pension pot or having to take out a loan as that fellow that Assange stayed with for six months had to. Assange broke his word to the court and the the suritors, then gave as an excuse at his trial for absconding that the husband of the judge being affected by Wikileaks meant the court hearing extradition case was one biased against him.

    After the sentence,’ the undaunted Frayne recorded, ‘I plainly told the Commandant in the Court that he was a Tyrant. He replied that no man had called him that I said that they knew the consequence to well to tell him so. The moment I expressed these words I was sentenced to an additional 1oo & to be kept ironed down in a cell for Life and never to see daylight again.” The floggings were spaced. Frayne got 5o lashes on his back. In four days, the cuts …

    Julian as Laurence Frayne and Belmarsh as Norfolk Island, where prisoners long to be hanged to end ceaseless flogging, eh? One thing he has in common with Frayne is a big mouth. He rubs the judge up the wrong way, and I don’t mean by suddenly stripping naked from the waist down and grinding his erect penis on her as he bizarrely did to the Swede he was staying with. This was around the time old Julian, having banged a couple of wooly-minded locals, decided Sweden was the place he wanted to live in permanently.

  79. Anonymous[428] • Disclaimer says:

    …but we’re a kind people and nation.

    Typical ignorant, arrogant and racist chest thumping oblivious of our crimes against our invented enemies. Try convincing the loved ones of over 2 million murdered Vietnamese, the estimated 1 million slaughtered Iraqis, thousands of Afghan civilians and Libyans killed of our “kindness” as a nation and as a people. Our “kindness”, especially in the conduct of our criminal wars extends exclusively to our Aryan tribesmen.

    Cruel and unusual punishment is not allowed here.

    That is eerily reminiscent of Obama’s inaugural address in which he declared “We don’t torture…” as he went on to become the world’s leading drone murderer and who presided over the destruction of Libya, along with the disgusting, trashy cunt, Hillary Clinton. He reneged on his promise to shut down Guantanamo where prisoners were routinely tortured, many of whom were held without charge. Many received the kinds of kangaroo court trials being prepared for Assange and one captured in 2002 was to be “sentenced” in 2019. Beam me up to your planet so I can enjoy the utopia you describe.

  80. Parfois1 says:

    WASP Empire is Anglo-Jewish Empire. It cannot be other, because of the inherent fruits of Judaizing heresy becoming deep culture of the nation it overcomes.

    That is an aspect of our culture I have neglected to look in depth – history glosses over that period (Reformation) to its lowest common denominator as being just religious wars, one faction rebelling against the dissolute ways of the Pope’s court. However, considering the events of the period and certain coincidences, such as the expulsion of the Jews from Iberia and their move en masse into Holland and that country eventually becoming a hotbed of the insurrection against the Church, followed by the Puritan rebellion in England and Cromwell’s alleged link with Jewry’s move into England, perhaps there is a case for looking deeper into the cause of schism, the wars and the Judaizing of Protestantism.

    It has all the ingredients suggestive of Jewish trademark – after all it served their purposes to put a wedge into the heart of the Church to splinter it, gain entry into the seat of power in England and ride on the back of the prospective Empire. What we are looking at in our time could be the remake of that historical upheaval: the Jewish propensity to propagate dissension and conflict, using their wealth to corrupt the ruling elites to influence events, etc.

    I’ve got to do some research and will start with a reliable outsider, Michel de Montaigne, a skeptic Christian and keen observer of the time.

    • Replies: @Nonny Mouse
  81. Parfois1 says:

    Michael and Marion Baraitser are both members of Jews for Justice for Palestinians.

    Oh yeah! What about justice for Julian Assange?

  82. Parfois1 says:

    Us, Europeans, have abolished the death penalty in our countries and do NOT extradite to countries who still execute inmates.

    Hear! Hear!

    There is another clown up here somewhere (you made a very graphic description of him, something one looks away when coming across it on the footpath in some places, and stinks) who claims that “cruel and unusual punishment is not allowed” in the US!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What a laugh! And says the constitution protects the citizens/prisoners!!!!!!!!!! What a dolt! Must be an escapee from the loony bin!

  83. Parfois1 says:
    @Twodees Partain

    Appeals are allowed (depending on the merits and available grounds) to the High Court and from there to the Supreme Court and even against the formal order by the relevant minister. The British superior courts have a good track record of independence from the executive and have considerable wide discretion to prevent extradition, particularly due to the political and vindictive nature of the prosecution and the likelihood of cruel and degrading treatment by the US justice. I’m sure the Assange’s legal team are already preparing a brief on how the US treats and tortures political prisoners.

    • Thanks: Iris
  84. It’s clear that the material that J.A. released had only political interest. It had also been gathered by someone who was dissatisfyed with a war and wanted to call attention to it, a political action. J.A’s activity was of a political nature. He made public the material that he got, like many journalists.

    Politicians, the press and the public wont do anything about this process. I could think of two interrelated actions that might help him. The first would be to make a copy of the report by Craig Murray about the trial and send it to associations of lawers in many countries and ask if they could make a pronouncement about that or sign a protest against this trial, simply because it doesn’t follow the norms of a fair trial, it looks like a show trial with predetermined results. The second action would be to send the same report to departments of political sciences in Europe and ask them to make a collective statement against political judgments in an European country.

    • Agree: Nonny Mouse
  85. Lol says:

    There’s no reason to put any faith in the actions or words of war criminal governments like America’s though. Lol

  86. @Jane Doe

    Ron needs to add an Awww! button 😉

  87. Dwax says:

    The one good thing about the IRA was their ability to deal with corrupt Brit judges.


  89. Corrupt says:

    The author assuming that this is political and therefore exempted from extradition is false.

    “The US/UK Deep State is a vengeful vicious beast that wants to punish Assange and Manning for revealing its nasty secrets.”

    As a former intelligence specialist I have no sympathy for Bradley Manning or Assange. If I had exposed classified information I would be spending a long time in jail, and it wouldn’t be political.

    • Replies: @Nonny Mouse
  90. @Corrupt

    Looks like rubbish. You would have a duty to your employer. A breach of confidence is not political.

    Totally different someone outside the USA under no obligation to anyone, who was taking care that his releases did not imperil anyone.

    • Replies: @Corrupt
  91. @Parfois1

    I don’t think you’ll find a connection there. Luther in particular made some very sharp criticisms of the Jews, though he was initially well-disposed towards them. I’m pretty sure Calvin was not interested in the Jews, only in the Bible. And had to deal with the French king’s persecutions.

    Cromwell at the time of his death was in negotiations with the Pope with a view to ending the restrictions on Roman Catholics in England, the legacy of Bloody Mary, Guy Fawkes and suchlike. He had also dealt in his army with squabbles among his soldiers between two denominations of Protestants, the Presbyterians and the Congregationalists. Had also rescued persecuted Quakers, I think many times. He was not an autocrat ever, could only help. Or perhaps was an autocrat but not with limitless power.

    My impression is that he was interested in ending religious conflict. The Irish go bonkers when you say that, bring up a massacre by his army at the end of a particular siege and on and on, but still that’s my impression.

    If so, that, ending religious conflict, may be what led him to reverse the expulsion of the Jews from England.

  92. Corrupt says:
    @Nonny Mouse

    The US regularly attempts to prosecute hackers from other countries. In some cases the other country is cooperative and the prosecution actually happens. In others (especially N. Korea, China, Russia) the country is unwilling to cooperate. Assange conspired to hack classified computer systems and should be prosecuted assuming the other country (in this case the UK) allows extradition.

    • Replies: @Nonny Mouse
  93. @Corrupt

    He did not. Assange did no hacking of US official sites or Killary’s mail server. Documents were leaked to him. Leaked documents are no longer confidential. Assange was under no duty not to quote them, and took care that release would not expose others to harm.

    And hacking didn’t originally have its journalistic meaning but meant working independently. Computer server intrusion is better called cracking.

    Assange should NOT be prosecuted. You are beastly. Worse than corrupt.

    • Disagree: Corrupt
    • Replies: @Corrupt
  94. Corrupt says:
    @Nonny Mouse

    From indictment description:

    “The superseding indictment alleges that Assange was complicit with Chelsea Manning, a former intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, in unlawfully obtaining and disclosing classified documents related to the national defense. Specifically, the superseding indictment alleges that Assange conspired with Manning; obtained from Manning and aided and abetted her in obtaining classified information with reason to believe that the information was to be used to the injury of the United States or the advantage of a foreign nation; received and attempted to receive classified information having reason to believe that such materials would be obtained, taken, made, and disposed of by a person contrary to law; and aided and abetted Manning in communicating classified documents to Assange.

    After agreeing to receive classified documents from Manning and aiding, abetting, and causing Manning to provide classified documents, the superseding indictment charges that Assange then published”

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Israel Shamir Comments via RSS