Another Birthday at Belmarsh Despite More U.S. Govt. Lies
With the arrival of Julian Assange’s 50th birthday, in prison he remains despite new revelations that poke holes in the U.S. Government’s case that keeps him there.
Since Judge Vanessa Baraitser’s decision in January not to extradite Julian Assange back to the United States, there has been no change in terms of Assange’s freedom nor the extradition effort. The only change exists in the foundation of the United States strategy of prosecuting the WikiLeaks founder— which, if it were to be accomplished, would result in a 175 year sentence.
Judge Baraitser’s ruling seemed to side with the reasoning behind why the U.S. wants him back, but ultimately swung the other way due to the combing factors of Assange’s exhausted state of mental health and the added cruelty that would come with top-security prisons in the global leader in incarceration: America. The ruling essentially marked that extradition to the U.S. would be a death sentence. He was subsequently denied bail out of concern for his tendency of absconding. So, stowed away in torturous conditions at Belmarsh prison, Assange awaits the approach of his 50th birthday.
Naturally, in the spirit of birthday celebrations, the United States government has continued its effort to achieve extradition of someone who they believe is a man whose very existence and livelihood is a threat to national security.
Of course, that’s not true by any means, and even they know that. They know he is a threat to their reputation and to their power
Assange and WikiLeaks, which has notably never needed to retract a story, have worked tirelessly to make room for transparency amongst the muck and grime of bureaucratic greed. By revealing truths about the heinous lies and crimes that formed the foundation for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, highlighting DNC manipulation of the primaries to keep Bernie Sanders from winning the nomination, and show high-profile leaders’ ties to Wall Street, among other things, Assange and WikiLeaks have managed to keep a little light on for the public in order to keep them from being blinded in the darkness. But by informing the public, there is a simultaneous affront to establishment power, thus beckoning that power dynamic’s wrath.
The attempt of the U.S. government to get Assange squeezed into their paw is a complete threat to all journalistic freedoms. Everyone knows that if Assange is prosecuted for publishing information from a protected source, that’s inferring that journalism itself is a crime, or that honest journalism is only acceptable when it exposes certain things that reveal very little about the clandestine functions of the core parts of the establishment.
Such a pursuit to clamp down on the process of the press sets a precedent that puts all U.S. media members and outlets, including longstanding and legacy outlets, at risk of falling under legal trouble for merely performing their job. Virtually all editorial boards take this stance on the issue. The idea that The New York Times could get in trouble for a single expose is horrifying in terms of the few freedoms that truly exist in this country— hence why this conundrum is known as The New York Times problem.
But the U.S. government never gives up. If they feel they’re on some mission, they always find a way back up to your door, much in the same manner as a Jehovah’s Witness, but just with sinister intentions. Relentless and savvy as they are, they tried to surpass some of the predicaments of prosecuting Assange for publishing information, so they bypassed the thorny route and paved an alternate one.
A prosecution on charges of hacking and conspiracy, on the other hand, is a feat that both causes less immediate concerns (only in theory) regarding press freedoms and simplifies the goal of demonizing Assange’s image— a “hacker” is far easier to vilify than a publisher.
The point is the U.S. decided to try to stick charges on Assange that suggested he worked with and directed Chelsea Manning and others to hack classified information.
The possibility of getting those charges to produce prosecution relies on one single testimony that, just this past weekend, snapped in half.
As the wooden post of support for that testimony snapped out at sea, the sails fell and had giant holes torn into them that reveal the mischievous hands of an authority that is visibly threatened. And motionless in the dark sea we remain, as the media, in conveniently redundant fashion, never picked up this story.
Yes, the media— the megaphone of the corporate establishment— predictably let this one fall through the cracks again…
Court documents included in Assange’s trial indicate that one Sigurdur Ingi Thordarson was instructed by Julian Assange to commit hacking operations against Icelandic members of parliament when Assange was in Iceland in 2010.
However, now, Thordarson has revealed to Icelandic media that he misrepresented himself and lied about claims of Assange’s direct involvement in hacking.
Through hours of interviews with journalists and revelations of chat logs, Thordarson has come clean and the U.S. prosecutorial narrative is wrecked.
Note, that back in 2010 and 2011 Thordarson had volunteered for a limited role at WikiLeaks in Iceland at a time when Assange was in the country for a press freedom project that advocated for a parliamentary resolution to support and protect whistleblowing and investigative journalism.
It should also be noted that Thordarson is a criminal sociopath who has a record of several convictions for sexual abuse of underage boys. In fact, in his volunteer role, Thordarson embezzled about $50,000 from WikiLeaks.
He was a notorious liar, and according to the chat logs, Thordarson was initiating unauthorized communications with high level hackers he got word of as a moderator for an online forum. In these communications, Thordarson would exaggerate his role at the organization as means to gain access to Icelandic entities or websites.
There is no indication or evidence— and now, there is no longer even a corroborating testimony— that WikiLeaks directed these actions or had any knowledge. In fact, Iceland was not even of much interest to Assange and WikiLeaks, and Thordarson was acting so secretively that he was copying the hard drives of WikiLeaks staff and stealing documents. The limited role at WikiLeaks was just a door to further criminal activity.
At one time in 2011, Thordarson got in contact with high-profile hacker Hector Xavier Monsegur, known simply by his hacker moniker Sabu. Unbeknownst to Thordarson as he kept up his probe for access to high level entities, Sabu had been arrested and was now working with the FBI.
All signs point to Thordarson acting alone without WiliLeaks’ knowledge. However, at that point, Thordarson had caught the eye of the FBI who saw an opportunity to trap Assange.
With Thordarson purporting to be a high-level WikiLeaks official as he sought to gain access to Icelandic entities and websites, the U.S., through Sabu’s hacking, initiated a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack on several government websites. The DDoS attacks make websites inaccessible for a period of time.
The point of this was for the FBI to come to Iceland and point out the DDoS attacks as a red flag that they can help with— a highly manipulative plan.
With the FBI in Iceland stoking false flames of danger regarding a potential hacking threat to Icelandic government agencies, former Icelandic Minister of Interior Ömundur Jónasson felt a little doubt about U.S. intentions, expressing in hindsight:
“They [the U.S.] were trying to use things here and use people in our country to spin a web … that would catch Julian Assange.”
As part of a coordinated investigation, Icelandic police officers, in turn, went to the U.S. to gather evidence, but came back with little to none. Following the visit, no other attacks were initiated against Icelandic interests.
With the U.S. government bent on getting Assange— an objective that has only revved up in intensity over the decade-plus and through three different presidential administrations— all they were looking for was another foothold to gain some grounding.
Thordarson, in frantic misrepresentation of himself, offered that foothold.
With WikiLeaks heavily pursuing Thordarson for thousands of dollars in missing proceeds that was supposedly gathered from merchandise, the ceiling began to fall in on him. As it turns out, Thordarson had transferred those funds to his personal account; he had dug himself a hole that he feared he’d never get out of.
So what does a serial liar do to get out of trouble? Seek out fellow serial liars to determine mutual ground to mitigate or even bypass the trouble— naturally.
In August 2011, Thordarson had contacted the U.S. Embassy offering specific information on the criminal investigation of Assange.
With a new pawn, the U.S. government’s case, which was put forth last summer, was constructed to claim that Assange directed various specific hacking operations that provided source material for WikiLeaks reports.
However, with Thordarson’s revelation about his litany of lies, that case crumbles.
To make this an even more damning and disgusting matter, while Thordarson was cooperating with the FBI, he was granted special protection as he committed various crimes ranging from theft to sexual abuse of minors. He was sentenced back in 2013 and 2014, but only with lenient consequences. Part of the reason he wanted to work with the FBI was he was under the impression he would get immunity for much of his crimes.
This backwards and deceptive behavior is no surprise coming from the establishment who will bend whatever rules they can to get an upper hand— and always without facing any consequences. In typical fashion, the CIA had been working with David Morales, the CEO of the Spanish security firm employed by the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. While Assange was there, through Morales, the CIA was able to surveil Assange until his arrest in April 2019.
Morales has since been arrested— six months after Assange. Spain’s High Court is looking into the ties between Morales and the CIA, and how they could have led to unlawful surveillance of Assange.
Not only will the U.S. establishment twist stories and facts to construct their own authoritative narrative, but they’re bending over backwards to do so.
In the mean time, they put press freedoms in danger while assaulting the public’s right to know. Plus, Assange— who turns 50 on July 3— is still being tortured in a prison as his family— including his now-wife and kids— along with supporters of free speech gather in solidarity to advocate for the right thing to be done: to free Julian Assange.
While The Huxleyan intends to remain free to the public, there are paid subscription offers (which would be more of a donation than receiving access to anything in particular) at $5/month, or $45/year. As always, donations are welcome and appreciated via Venmo (@john-pongratz). Again, as those are just options, everything remains free. Thank you for reading and be sure to subscribe, comment, and share!