Amnesty International : Home Secretary’s certification of Assange extradition puts him at risk

On the 17th June 2022, Amnesty International posted Responding to the news that the UK Home Secretary Priti Patel has certified Julian Assange’s extradition to the United States to face charges under the Espionage Act, Agnes Callamard, Amnesty International Secretary General said: “Allowing Julian Assange to be extradited to the US would put him at … Continue reading “Amnesty International : Home Secretary’s certification of Assange extradition puts him at risk”

On the 17th June 2022, Amnesty International posted

Responding to the news that the UK Home Secretary Priti Patel has certified Julian Assange’s extradition to the United States to face charges under the Espionage Act, Agnes Callamard, Amnesty International Secretary General said:

“Allowing Julian Assange to be extradited to the US would put him at great risk and sends a chilling message to journalists the world over.”

“If the extradition proceeds, Amnesty International is extremely concerned that Assange faces a high risk of prolonged solitary confinement, which would violate  the prohibition on torture or other ill treatment. Diplomatic assurances provided by the US that Assange will not be kept in solitary confinement cannot be taken on face value given previous history.”

“We call on the UK to refrain from extraditing Julian Assange, for the US to drop the charges, and for Assange to be freed.”

Julian Assange is likely to further appeal the extradition on separate  grounds that it violates his right to freedom of expression.

For more information or to arrange an interview, please contact:        

+44 20 7413 5566        

email: press@amnesty.org         

twitter: @amnestypress  

Read original post on Amnesty International

The Trial of Julian Assange: A Story of Persecution

On the 5th June 2022, John Jiggens covered the book ‘The Trial of Julian Assange’ by Nils Melzer in Pearls and Irritations Nils Melzer was UN Special Rapporteur on Torture between 2016 and 2022. In 2019 he began investigating the case of Julian Assange. The English language edition of his book, The Trial of Julian Assange, … Continue reading “The Trial of Julian Assange: A Story of Persecution”

On the 5th June 2022, John Jiggens covered the book ‘The Trial of Julian Assange’ by Nils Melzer in Pearls and Irritations

Nils Melzer was UN Special Rapporteur on Torture between 2016 and 2022. In 2019 he began investigating the case of Julian Assange. The English language edition of his book, The Trial of Julian Assange, is the most well-researched account of the legal ordeals suffered by the WikiLeaks founder. A brave and an important book, it corrects the mainstream narrative substantially.

Initially, Nils Melzer had declined to get involved in the Assange case because he too believed the mainstream media narrative that presented Assange as a spy, a rapist, and a narcissist. But in 2019, Assange’s lawyers warned him that the situation for Assange was becoming critical.

After visiting Assange in prison, Melzer began to see the case for what it was: a story of political persecution. Julian Assange was being arbitrarily punished for having publicised the dirty secrets of the powerful. It was the criminalisation of investigative journalism. His decade-long containment, first in the Ecuadorian Embassy, then in Belmarsh prison, due to prosecutions by the UK, the USA and Sweden, had resulted in a progressively intensifying state of mental and emotional distress that amounted to psychological torture.

As Melzer writes in his introduction:

“I write this book because, when investigating the case of Julian Assange, I came across compelling evidence of political persecution and gross judicial arbitrariness, as well as of deliberate torture and ill-treatment.”

When he presented his findings to the governments concerned, Sweden, the UK, and the USA, his well-written letters about human rights, the rule of law, proportionality, and the presumption of innocence, were treated with an indifference scarcely distinguishable from contempt that displayed imperial scorn for his United Nations’ mandate.

Fearing his silence would be tantamount to complicity in the cover-up of serious crimes─ both those exposed by Assange and those committed against him ─ Melzer decided he had to write this book. This was a highly unusual action, but he felt a fundamental freedom, the freedom of information, was being deliberately suppressed, while those in power were torturing a dissident for releasing evidence of their war crimes.

As UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, Melzer believed his mandate was to the people, not to powerful states. He writes:

“This is especially true when it comes to the practice of torture and abuse, when our fundamental freedoms of expression, of the press, and of information are being suppressed, and when those in power claim impunity for corruption and the most serious crimes. So, I suppose, in a way, by writing this book, I have become a whistleblower myself.”

As Melzer’s investigation continued, it revealed rampant legal abuses by the states involved: Assange had faced grave and systematic due process violations, judicial bias, and manipulated evidence in both the UK and Sweden.

The multi-lingual Melzer has two chapters, Swedish Judicial Persecution and Anglo-Swedish Extradition Trial, exposing the legal charade behind the (non-existent!) rape charges that the mainstream media continually used to blacken Assange’s name. Despite the endless tabloid headlines, in nine years the Swedish case never advanced beyond being a ‘preliminary investigation’. There were never any charges. The Swedish prosecutors seemed singularly disinterested in interviewing Assange or resolving the case. Assange’s preliminary investigation holds the record for the longest preliminary investigation in Swedish history: it dragged on for nine years, and was conveniently dropped when the US extradition request replaced it.

Shortly before Assange left for Sweden, US intelligence consulting firm Stratfor had outlined the strategy for US allies to adopt with Assange:

 ‘Pile on. Move him from country to country to face various charges for the next 25 years. But seize everything he and his family own, to include every person linked to Wiki.’ 

So, when two women approached the Swedish police to get Assange to have an STD test, the rape narrative was quickly imposed. Melzer devotes a substantial part of the book to his examination of the Swedish rape narrative and his language skills, his fluency in Swedish, coupled with his authority as a UN Special Rapporteur to obtain evidence about the Swedish prosecution, make Melzer’s assessment damning. The Swedish Prosecution Authority never pursued justice or the law, neither for Assange, nor the two women, Melzer concludes: “All three were instrumentalised by the authorities for the purpose of political persecution and deterrence.”

Melzer speculates that the Swedish reason for discrediting Assange was that Assange was investigating setting up WikiLeaks in Sweden, naively believing Sweden was an independent country, when it wasn’t. Swedish independence was only window-dressing for the Swedish population; beneath the surface, ‘independent’ Sweden was deeply integrated into NATO. The Swedish deep state was made aware Assange’s plans to establish WikiLeaks in Sweden would draw major US disapproval!

Twelve years later, ‘Pile-on’ remains the strategy adopted by the US and its allies. This death by a thousand court cases will grind remorselessly onward until the Australian people force their government to forsake their shameful abandonment of this Australian citizen.

For independent media, the case of Julian Assange sets an alarming precedent as numerous journalist organisations such as the Independent Consortium of Journalists, Journalists without Borders, the UK National Union of Journalists, and the Australian Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance, all affirm. Melzer reminds us that when telling the truth becomes a crime, we will all be living in a tyranny.

We are on the edge of that precipice now. The incarceration of Julian Assange for revealing war crimes is the most crucial judicial scandal of this century.

Before they silenced him by locking him away in Belmarsh Prison – when he had a voice! – Julian Assange used to say that courage is contagious. As horrible as the story of the persecution of Julian Assange is, the bravery of Melzer, his decision to stand with Assange, knowing the likely consequences─ as Julian Assange also knew! ─demonstrates that courage remains infectious, even when the powerful most wantonly display their bottomless malevolence.

As Melzer concludes.

“Even in the darkest room, the light of a single candle is enough to enable everyone to see. Julian Assange has lit such a candle with his work. He has exposed war crimes, abuse and corruption that has been concealed behind a curtain of secrecy. It was only a brief glimpse behind the curtain, but sometimes one glimpse is enough to change our whole world view. We now know that this curtain of secrecy exists and that a parallel world of dirty secrets lies behind it.”

Read original article Pearls and Irritations

ABC Talkback — Can the Government Intervene to Assist Assange?

On 6th June 2022, ABC’s Life Matters with Nat Tencic interviews fellow Australians held in foreign prisons Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says he want a conclusion to the Julian Assange matter, but what can his government do?  Peter Greste and Kylie Moore-Gilbert, who were both held in foreign prisons, discuss what the government’s involvement was … Continue reading “ABC Talkback — Can the Government Intervene to Assist Assange?”

On 6th June 2022, ABC’s Life Matters with Nat Tencic interviews fellow Australians held in foreign prisons

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says he want a conclusion to the Julian Assange matter, but what can his government do? 

Peter Greste and Kylie Moore-Gilbert, who were both held in foreign prisons, discuss what the government’s involvement was in their release.

Guests:
Gabriel Shipton, Julian Assange’s brother and producer of ‘Ithaka’
Peter Greste, Professor of Journalism, Macquarie University
Kylie Moore-Gilbert, lecturer, Middle Eastern Studies,
Melbourne University

Duration: 42min 53sec
Broadcast: Mon 6 Jun 2022, 9:06am

Listen on ABC Talkback

Wallraff Prize winner 2022 Julian Assange

On the 19th May 2022, Birgit Wentzien writes on Stella Morris accepting the Günter Wallraff Prize 2022 for Journalism Criticism on behalf of Julian Assange (Google Translation) Julian Assange has been awarded the Günter Wallraff Prize 2022. His wife Stella Morris accepted the award on May 19, 2022 at the Cologne Forum for Journalism Criticism on … Continue reading “Wallraff Prize winner 2022 Julian Assange”

On the 19th May 2022, Birgit Wentzien writes on Stella Morris accepting the Günter Wallraff Prize 2022 for Journalism Criticism on behalf of Julian Assange (Google Translation)

Julian Assange has been awarded the Günter Wallraff Prize 2022. His wife Stella Morris accepted the award on May 19, 2022 at the Cologne Forum for Journalism Criticism on behalf of her husband, who is being held in London. In the following we document the laudatory speech by Birgit Wentzien, editor-in-chief of Deutschlandfunk.

Spy, traitor, enemy of the state – freedom fighter, activist, investigative journalist. It depends who you ask. No this can not be.

Julian Assange published secret documents from governments, companies and organizations via the Wikileaks disclosure platform. Files from the US Guantanamo detention center, diplomatic emails and evidence of war crimes in Iraq.

Making grievances public is a core task of journalism. That is exactly what Julian Assange did. He has published secret documents leaked to him by his sources. But he did not collect or steal these documents himself. Should Julian Assange be convicted for this, it would set a global precedent and act as a deterrent to reporters around the world.”Julian Assange affects us all.” For the US Attorney’s Office, Assange is not a journalist. When asked if he would describe Assange as a high-tech terrorist or a whistleblower, Joe Biden, then US Vice President, replied, “I would say he’s a high-tech terrorist.”

What happens to us when we don’t dare anymore to call a spade a spade? Accepting this is self-abandonment – ​​of democracy, freedom of opinion and freedom of the press. Period. In “Truth and Politics”, Hannah Arendt speaks of a double danger to which democratic societies are exposed. One danger is the systematic blurring of the distinction between truth and lies. And the other danger is the temptation to close your eyes and ears to uncomfortable truths.Freedom of expression is a farce when information about the facts is not guaranteed. Freedom of expression begins where the facts are clear. Journalists cannot report on a war that shouldn’t be one. A war is a war. And the other way around and also with Hannah Arendt: “Where lies are lied to on principle and not just occasionally, the one who simply says what is, has already started to act.”

In 2020, Günter Wallraff initiated an appeal for the release of Julian Assange from prison – for medical and constitutional reasons. Günter Wallraff says: “It’s not just about Julian Assange himself, but about defending freedom of expression and freedom of the press. If journalists and whistleblowers have to fear that they will pay for the disclosure of state crimes with imprisonment or their lives, then the fourth estate and with it democracy are in danger.”
The Günter Wallraff Prize 2022 goes to Julian Assange and it is a great honor and pleasure for us that Stella Moris is accepting this prize here in Cologne.
A warm welcome and thanks, and please accept the award for your husband, but also for your own actions and work in this matter that is so important to all of us.

Read original article in Deutschlandfunk

Priti Patel, Hear This Loud and Clear: Julian Assange Must Not be Handed Over to the US

On the 10th May 2022, Duncan Campbell, posted his opinion in The Guardian A decision from the home secretary is imminent. Extradition would set a disastrous precedent Priti Patel now has to make one of the most important decisions of her career: will she bow to heavy pressure from the United States and send a … Continue reading “Priti Patel, Hear This Loud and Clear: Julian Assange Must Not be Handed Over to the US”

On the 10th May 2022, Duncan Campbell, posted his opinion in The Guardian

A decision from the home secretary is imminent. Extradition would set a disastrous precedent

Priti Patel now has to make one of the most important decisions of her career: will she bow to heavy pressure from the United States and send a vulnerable man who has been convicted of no crime to face an indeterminate number of years in an American jail where he may experience intimidation and isolation? Her decision is imminent and all other legal avenues have been explored.

This was the scenario 10 years ago in the case of Gary McKinnon, the computer hacker who, working out of his north London bedroom, trawled through the computer systems of Nasa and the US defence department in search of information about UFOs and left behind some mildly rude messages about the systems’ sloppy security. The home secretary was Theresa May, who halted extradition proceedings at the last minute.

Now Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder and also a vulnerable man – who has been in Belmarsh high-security prison for three years without being convicted of any crime – is facing extradition, with the issue due to be decided this month. Once again, the home secretary has an opportunity to demonstrate, as May did, that respect for justice and humanity are much finer and more enduring qualities than appeasement.

It is worth recalling the words of party leaders in support of McKinnon after Labour home secretaries – to their great shame – declined to intervene in the years after his initial arrest in 2002. Nick Clegg, then leading the Liberal Democrats in opposition, said that McKinnon “has been hung out to dry by a British government desperate to appease its American counterparts”. David Cameron, before he became prime minister, had said: “McKinnon is a vulnerable young man and I see no compassion in sending him thousands of miles away from his home and loved ones to face trial.” 

The current case is different in that, while McKinnon remained at liberty, Assange has been held in custody alongside murderers and terrorists after the seven years he spent in the Ecuadorian embassy, seeking political asylum. He should have been given bail long ago to be with his wife, Stella Moris, whom he married in prison in March, and their two young children; he could simply be electronically tagged and monitored. It is also different in that he faces charges under the Espionage Act which carries a potential sentence of 175 years. And yes, the US criminal justice system does actually impose such medieval sentences.

Last year, at the Summit for Democracy, Joe Biden pledged to support a free press: “It’s the bedrock of democracy. It’s how the public stay informed and how governments are held accountable. Around the world, press freedom is under threat.” As it happens, it is 50 years since Daniel Ellsberg was being prosecuted under a similar law to the ones Assange faces for releasing the Pentagon Papers which exposed the lies and hypocrisies of the Vietnam war. He is one of Assange’s staunchest supporters. This week he told me that “this extradition would mean that journalists, anywhere in the world, could be extradited to the US for exposing information classified in the US”. He argues that it would also set a precedent that any reporter could be extradited to other countries for exposing information classified in those countries.Advertisement

Assange also has the backing of all organisations that battle on behalf of freedom of expression, from Amnesty International to Reporters Without Borders. As Julia Hall of Amnesty International puts it: “Demanding that states like the UK extradite people for publishing classified information that is in the public interest sets a dangerous precedent and must be rejected.” 

In March, the justice secretary, Dominic Raab, told the Daily Mail of plans for a new bill of rights: “We’ve got to be able to strengthen free speech, the liberty that guards all of our other freedoms, and stop it being whittled away surreptitiously, sometimes without us really being conscious of it.” How empty those words will be if Assange is extradited.

It was, after all, thanks to WikiLeaks and Assange that the world saw the secret video of a US aircrew falsely claiming to have encountered a firefight in Baghdad and then laughing after their airstrike killed a dozen people, including two Iraqi journalists. Should our ability to see that footage be “whittled away surreptitiously”?

Another Assange advocate is Janis Sharp, McKinnon’s mother, who fought so gallantly on his behalf – a battle now being made into a film. “Ten years’ loss of liberty is surely more than long enough for an extremely ill, autistic man, a whistleblower who shared information of a war crime that he felt was in the public interest to know,” she told me. “Seeing my own son Gary McKinnon suicidal and in permanent mental torment through the terror of proposed extradition, leaves me in no doubt that much-needed compassion must be brought to bear in this very lengthy tragic case.”

Patel has an important choice, but it is not difficult. Extradition should be resisted. Assange should be released and allowed to resume a normal life. Anyone who seriously values freedom of expression should support his fight.

Read original article in The Guardian

Assange Dao

In February 2022 a collective of cypherpunks launched a fund raising initiative for justice for Julian The mission of the AssangeDAO is to inspire a powerful solidarity network and fight for the freedom of Julian Assange. We will raise funds to help with his legal fees and campaigns to increase public awareness on the systemic … Continue reading “Assange Dao”

In February 2022 a collective of cypherpunks launched a fund raising initiative for justice for Julian

The mission of the AssangeDAO is to inspire a powerful solidarity network and fight for the freedom of Julian Assange. We will raise funds to help with his legal fees and campaigns to increase public awareness on the systemic failure of our justice systems.

We, the cypherpunks, are rallying to the cause of a fellow cypherpunk in distress.

‘One of the best ways to achieve justice is to expose injustice.’
— Assange

Proceeds raised from the NFT sale will benefit Julian Assange’s defense fund for legal fees and campaigning to raise awareness about Julian’s extradition case. The Assange family have worked closely with the DAO and endorses its efforts to unite cypherpunks all over the world.

Web Site : https://assangedao.org
Twitter : https://twitter.com/AssangeDAO
Fund Raising: https://juicebox.money/#/p/assangedao

Current Funds Raised $USD 45 million

An archive of Julian’s messages to the cypherpunk mailing list, 1995-98 to 2001-02: https://cryptome.org/0001/assange-cpunks.htm

Julian Assange Has a Stroke in Belmarsh Prison

On 12 December 2021, Sarah Oliver reported in The Daily Mail Julian Assange has had a stroke in Belmarsh Prison, his fiancee Stella Moris revealed last night. The WikiLeaks publisher, 50, who is being held on remand in the maximum-security jail while fighting extradition to America, was left with a drooping right eyelid, memory problems and … Continue reading “Julian Assange Has a Stroke in Belmarsh Prison”

On 12 December 2021, Sarah Oliver reported in The Daily Mail

Julian Assange has had a stroke in Belmarsh Prison, his fiancee Stella Moris revealed last night.

The WikiLeaks publisher, 50, who is being held on remand in the maximum-security jail while fighting extradition to America, was left with a drooping right eyelid, memory problems and signs of neurological damage.

He believes the mini-stroke was triggered by the stress of the ongoing US court action against him, and an overall decline in his health as he faces his third Christmas behind bars.

It happened at the time of a High Court appearance via video link from Belmarsh in October.

A ‘transient ischaemic attack’ – the interruption of the blood supply to the brain – can be a warning sign of a full stroke. Assange has since had an MRI scan and is now taking anti-stroke medication.

Ms Moris, 38, a lawyer, said: ‘Julian is struggling and I fear this mini-stroke could be the precursor to a more major attack. It compounds our fears about his ability to survive the longer this long legal battle goes on. 

‘It urgently needs to be resolved. Look at animals trapped in cages in a zoo. It cuts their life short. That’s what’s happening to Julian. The never-ending court cases are extremely stressful mentally.’ 

She said he was kept in his cell for long periods and was ‘short of fresh air and sunlight, an adequate diet and the stimulus he needs’.

But Ms Moris said: ‘I believe this constant chess game, battle after battle, the extreme stress, is what caused Julian’s stroke on October 27. 

He was feeling really unwell, far too ill to follow the hearing, and he was excused by the judge but could not leave the prison video room.

‘It must have been horrendous hearing a High Court appeal in which you can’t participate, which is discussing your mental health and your risk of suicide and in which the US is arguing you are making it all up. 

‘He had to sit through all this when he should have been excused. He was in a truly terrible state. His eyes were out of synch, his right eyelid would not close, his memory was blurry.’

Assange was examined by a doctor, who found a delayed pupil response when a light was shone into one eye – a sign of potential nerve damage.

Ms Moris and Assange have two sons, Gabriel, four, and Max, two, and have been engaged for five years. She said he had ‘more or less’ recovered – but she fears the attack shows his health is failing.

She visited him for around an hour yesterday, taking the children to see him in a prison hall shared by dozens of inmates and their loved ones.

She said Assange was distressed about being kept from his family, adding: ‘He finds the prospect of a third Christmas in prison difficult.’

Assange was examined by a doctor, who found a delayed pupil response when a light was shone into one eye – a sign of potential nerve damage.

Ms Moris and Assange have two sons, Gabriel, four, and Max, two, and have been engaged for five years. She said he had ‘more or less’ recovered – but she fears the attack shows his health is failing.

She visited him for around an hour yesterday, taking the children to see him in a prison hall shared by dozens of inmates and their loved ones.

She said Assange was distressed about being kept from his family, adding: ‘He finds the prospect of a third Christmas in prison difficult.’

Read original article in The Daily Mail

The Australian Broadcasting Commission Posts Three Times More Articles About Alexei Navalny than Julian Assange Year to Date

On the 31st of October 2021 the editors reviewed the potential for news bias by the ABC ( Australian Broadcasting Commission ) A quick review of ABC articles referring to Alexei Navalny counts 51 articles referencing Alexei Navalny by name A similar review of ABC articles referring to Julian Assange shows 17 articles referencing Julian Assange … Continue reading “The Australian Broadcasting Commission Posts Three Times More Articles About Alexei Navalny than Julian Assange Year to Date”

On the 31st of October 2021 the editors reviewed the potential for news bias by the ABC ( Australian Broadcasting Commission )

A quick review of ABC articles referring to Alexei Navalny counts 51 articles referencing Alexei Navalny by name

A similar review of ABC articles referring to Julian Assange shows 17 articles referencing Julian Assange name being
January 7
February 1
March 1
July 3
August 2
October 5
With the months with more articles coinciding with court hearings

The reporting of the CIA Kidnapping and Assassination plot was posted on the ABC on October 1 and first published on Yahoo News on the 26th September. This was prompted by a letter from prominent Australian to the Prime Minster and not based on outrage at the US Government plotting against an Australian citizen

The editors found no report in the ABC on the retraction of crucial evidence by Sigurdur Ingi (Siggi) Thordarson as published in the Icelandic paper Stundin on the 7th September.

The ABC is slightly more balanced than the British Guardian with nearly 5 times the articles in favour of Navalny (78 to 16 articles)

Of interest is is that Claire Daly, Irish MEP, addressed the European Parliament Nalvany saying ‘Navalny is a vicious anti-immigration racist on maybe 4% of the population support rallying support of hundreds or thousands in cities with populations of millions. We would not be discussing if not raised in Russia. Meanwhile Julian Assange has been incarcerated for almost ten years and we cannot mention his name.’

And Julian Assange is an Australian citizen and a world famous journalist.

While the ABC has a track record of autonomy ad news worthy reporting to bring the Government and big business to account and many issues. There appears a definite blind spot for the Australian citizen Julian Assange.

In his own words: Assange witness explains fabrications

On the 7th September Icelandic newspaper Stundin publishes an interview with Sigurdur Ingi (Siggi) Thordarson by Bjartmar Oddur Þeyr Alexandersson and Gunnar Hrafn Jansson A maj­or wit­n­ess in the United States’ Depart­ment of Justice ca­se against Ju­li­an Assange casts ser­i­ous dou­bt on statements found in the indict­ment against the Wiki­leaks found­er. As Stundin previously reported, a key witness … Continue reading “In his own words: Assange witness explains fabrications”

On the 7th September Icelandic newspaper Stundin publishes an interview with Sigurdur Ingi (Siggi) Thordarson by Bjartmar Oddur Þeyr Alexandersson and Gunnar Hrafn Jansson

A maj­or wit­n­ess in the United States’ Depart­ment of Justice ca­se against Ju­li­an Assange casts ser­i­ous dou­bt on statements found in the indict­ment against the Wiki­leaks found­er.

As Stundin previously reported, a key witness in the case against Julian Assange has admitted to fabrications and thus cast serious doubt on statements found in the indictment against the Wikileaks founder. We can now share audio recordings of that witness, Sigurdur Ingi (Siggi) Thordarson, where he discusses his part in the case and what originally led him to entangle himself in an FBI investigation while he was a delinquent teenager on a crime spree.

The excerpts presented here are taken from over nine hours of audio recordings of Thordarson willingly discussing his crimes and deceptions with Stundin’s reporter. 

One issue, that was raised in the updated indictment against Assange presented to UK courts for the purposes of seeking extradition to the United States, is the claim that he received audio files containing secret recordings of members of the Icelandic parliament. 

Thordarson, known also as Siggi, now says he handed Assange a USB drive in early 2010 but had no knowledge of what was on it. He did not even know if there were any actual audio files on the drive, much less what such files may have contained. This appears to contradict the indictment, where Siggi Thordarson is cited as a source.

Reporter: “You also sent it to Julian?”

Siggi: “Yes, well, I gave him a memory stick.”

Reporter: “A memory stick with the conversations on it?”

Siggi: “Yes.”

Reporter: ”OK. So he received these phone calls?”

Siggi: “At least he received some files. I never listened to them so I have no idea what was on there.”

Reporter: “You didn’t feel like checking it out to hear it? How large was this file?”

Siggi: “I don’t remember, I was doing something at the time so I thought I’d just throw it at Julian and he’d go over it.”

Reporter: “OK, but how large was this file? How large was the memory stick, was it like 16 gigabytes or 2 gigabytes?”

Siggi: “No, no, it would have been on a 34 or 64 gigabyte stick.”

The UK judge cited this part of the indictment in the judgment over extradition, saying Thordarson was asked by Assange: “…to hack into computers to obtain information including audio recordings of phone conversations between high-ranking officials, including members of the Parliament, of the government of “NATO country 1” [Note: Here the prosecution claims that Assange is not charged for receiving or publishing information offered to him, but rather that he actively sought out information. As an example of this, the prosecution claims that the parliament call recording incident was an attempt to obtain the data through hacking.] 

When confronted, Thordarson admits this is not true but claims he is not allowed to elaborate on why the indictment does not match his purported testimony.

Reporter: “Did you tell the FBI that…”

Siggi: “That I hacked them? No.”

Reporter: “…and that Assange asked you to hack them?”

Siggi: “No.”

Reporter: “Then why does the indictment claim you said that?”

Siggi: “I can’t answer that.”

Reporter: “Is it because you don’t want to, or is it because of the FBI you can’t answer?”

Siggi: “I can’t answer that.”

Reporter: “Why can’t you answer?”

Siggi: “Because I’m not allowed to.”

Thordarson was recently called in to provide further testimony on the case in the United States. He says he cannot go into details about his trip but the focus of the discussion was on new information, rather than confirming what he had claimed before.

Siggi: “There were a lot of questions that had never been raised before, so that wouldn’t have made sense.”

Reporter: “OK, so there was an attempt to open a new line of investigation as my sources claim?”

Siggi: “A new line?”

Reporter: “In other words, they were looking into other subjects than they had previously done with you?”

Siggi: “Yes.”

Reporter: “And those subjects pertained to extending the investigation into different areas than contained in this indictment?”

Siggi: “I couldn’t say.”

Reporter: “You couldn’t say or you aren’t allowed to say?”

Siggi: “Either one.” *laughs*

Reporter: “You have to choose one, Siggi! You have to pick an option!”

Siggi: “I can’t comment on that.”

Reporter: “So you aren’t allowed to comment?”

Siggi: “Yes.”

The FBI has access to communications between Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning, as they seized computer equipment belonging to the latter when she was arrested. In one conversation Assange mentions receiving documents relating to the collapse of the Icelandic banking system. The collapse was a direct result of reckless and even criminal actions by top-level bankers, and Wikileaks had exposed similar wrongdoing at another Icelandic bank two years earlier.

Thordarson has now revealed himself to be the source mentioned in the chat log between Manning and Assange. However, he simply laughed and declined to go on the record when asked how he managed to steal the documents from under the noses of the resolution committee of the failed bank Glitnir.

Reporter: “On the 5th of March 2010 Assange said to Manning that he had acquired stolen bank documents from a source, that source was in fact you?”

Siggi: “Yes.”

Reporter: “What bank documents are those?”

Siggi: “From Milestone and Glitnir and…”

Reporter: “OK, those are the Milestone documents you had taken with a memory stick that you just used to take it from their computer, right? The computer was open, wasn’t it?”

Siggi: “I don’t remember. But these are documents that pertain to…”

Reporter: “But these are the documents you took, the Milestone…”

Siggi: “Yeah, he was talking about those.”

Reporter: “OK, but is he talking about something more than that? Because…

Siggi: “Yeah, because I had and still have Glitnir bank’s loan book that was never published. I also had a file that was Landsbanki’s loan book but it was encrypted. I was going to get David House to see if he could use this supercomputer at MIT to encr… decrypt it.”

Reporter: “Decrypt it. That’s the file that was floating around everywhere online? Everyone was trying to decrypt it, it had already been downloaded…”

Siggi: “Indeed.”

Reporter: “What about the Glitnir loan book, where did that come from?”

Siggi: “Ahaha… I’ll tell you that off the record.”

Thordarson is a well known fraudster in Iceland and appears to have made his living through the years by cheating and stealing from a long list of local companies. As part of his fraudulent schemes he ran an online store with Wikileaks merchandise in 2010 and claimed to be raising money for the organization. However, it all went into his personal bank account and he refuses to say what he did with the money he stole from Wikileaks.

Reporter: “I’m a little curious to know where that went…”

Siggi: “I’ll let you know as soon as I find out, haha!” 

Reporter: “OK, so you got the money deposited into your bank account, right?”

Siggi: “Indeed.”

Reporter: “We can go off the record if you want?”

Siggi: “Doesn’t matter, I admitted to it in court. But you see the store was and always had been in my name.”

Members of the Wikileaks organization eventually became aware of what was happening and tried desperately to find Thordarson and recover the money. He was also wanted for various other crimes in Iceland, including financial fraud and sexual abuse of minors. It was at this time he decided to walk into the United States embassy in Reykjavík and offer testimony against Assange in exchange for protection. However, this inadvertently put him in even more trouble.

Thordarson had previously been in contact with the infamous hacking collective known as Lulzec, headed by a person using the alias Sabu. What Thordarson did not know at the time was that Sabu had been arrested by the FBI and turned informant only a month earlier. By asking Sabu to hack Icelandic government sites Thordarson had so thoroughly incriminated himself that US authorities had him in a vice. He says officials told him he faced a lengthy prison sentence if he didn’t cooperate fully.

Reporter: “They just say to you, here’s the situation, and they lay it out.”

Siggi: “Yup.”

Reporter: “And that didn’t paint a pretty picture according to my sources.”

Siggi: “Indeed.”

Reporter: “They were perhaps even pointing out that you were headed to prison imminently if you didn’t answer the FBIs questions and work with the FBI on this. You are panicking at that point.”

Siggi: “I don’t look at it as a threat. Stating the obvious isn’t necessarily a threat.”

Reporter: “Look… it feels like the Icelandic police were telling you that they would make the charges in Iceland disappear.”

Siggi: “Yes.”

Reporter: “…and the FBI would make the American charges disappear? So by making an immunity deal with the Americans you would be off the hook for anything that could cause you problems back home?”

Siggi: “Huh. That’s news to me.”

It appears the deal was for Thordarson to provide statements that could strengthen the indictment against Assange, in exchange for total immunity. He would get away with his crimes, as he himself put it.

Reporter: “You were the small fry, you knew they wanted the big fish, and you provided everything to help them catch the big fish.” 

Siggi: “Yeah. I agree with that portrayal, that’s the way it was. But the idea when I was there back in the summer of 2011 or whatever, that wasn’t the idea. I had just been backed into a massive corner and I folded.”

Reporter: “OK, but you can see that from my point of view this story is full of holes.”  

Siggi: “Sure.”

Reporter: “The amount of pressure you are under, mental and physical, from the FBI. If you aren’t cooperating 110% you are simply f—ked.”

Siggi: “They would have already revoked this immunity deal if I was lying.”

Reporter: “Is that really so?” 

Siggi: “Yes!”

Reporter: “Because they are basing a lot on just your word.”

Siggi: “It’s stated many times in my agreement that if I were to be caught out lying, just one false word, the immunity agreement would be revoked. And they could proceed with prosecuting me. There is nothing in the indictment about what evidence they have, the justice system doesn’t require that to be public.” 

Reporter: “Actually that is part of discovery…”

Siggi: “When it goes to court.”

Reporter: “Sure, but…”

Siggi: “There you have an indictment that will be added to later. 

Reporter: “Yes, but still, if they can’t get him extradited from the UK they have no case.”

Siggi: “The [UK] judge didn’t refuse extradition based on the evidence of the case, it was for health reasons.”

Reporter: “Exactly.”

Siggi: “Are you trying to tell me they wouldn’t just immediately request extradition from whatever country he would travel to next? The only thing that can save Julian now is if Joe Biden blows the whole thing off.”

Reporter: “What would happen to you in that case?”

Siggi: “I don’t know.”

Reporter: “I mean if the US attorney general says the investigation is over and nothing further will be done, because Biden says so, what happens to you?”

Siggi: “I have an immunity agreement, it wouldn’t be invalidated.”

Reporter: “Even if the case is dismissed?”

Siggi: “Yes.”

Reporter: “So you get away with all your crimes?”

Siggi: “That is my understanding.”

It is not clear to what extent the Icelandic authorities were informed about these arrangements, if at all. Indeed Thordarson claims he was assured by the FBI that no information would be shared with the Icelandic police about crimes he committed in Iceland, particularly the hacking attempts against Icelandic institutions.

Siggi: “My worry was that if I told them who was hacked and how, like Landsvirkjun and the government’s website and all that, I would become a target of Icelandic authorities.”

Reporter: “Why?”

Siggi: “Eventually I asked if they [Icelandic authorities] would get access to the data I talked about and they [the FBI] just said no, that would never happen. That was the only discussion I had with the FBI about Icelandic authorities.”

Thordarson is now 28 but was a teenager when he volunteered to work for Wikileaks a decade ago. He claims to hold no personal ill will against Julian Assange but regrets getting involved in “this adventure” as he puts it. Thordarson says he suffers from extreme anxiety and insomnia as a result of his experiences and does not fully trust the FBI or the American justice department to keep up their end of the deal, but is hopeful they will. 

Siggi: “Of course they can fuck me up! Of course they can. In that case it’s just a ball I’ll tackle when it gets to me, I can’t be bothered to think about it beforehand.”

Reporter: “It’s a pretty big ball, Siggi!”

Siggi: “For sure! I won’t deny that, not at all. But will it help me to worry about it at this point? No. 

Reporter: “Do you have anxiety about the [Assange] case being dropped?”

Siggi: “About what will happen?”

Reporter: “Yes.”

Siggi: “Yes.”

Reporter: “So the prospect of Julian being a free man, it gives you anxiety?” 

Siggi: “Him being free? I would celebrate that.”

Reporter: “Ok, but…”

Siggi: “As far as the impact on me personally, we’ll just have to find out.”

Reporter: “OK, I know you and Julian had a very close relationship.”

Siggi: “Mhm.”

Reporter: “You do realize this testimony could cost him his life.”

Siggi: “I do.”

Reporter: “How does that make you feel?”

Siggi: “What we’re dealing with there is that you shouldn’t just bring a 17 or 18 year old boy into something like this.”

Reporter: “Are you angry at him?”

Siggi: “No.”

Reporter: “Do you feel hurt?”

Siggi: “No.”

Reporter: “What are your feelings toward Julian today?”

Siggi: “I… don’t know.”

He elaborates, saying the entire thing felt unreal and more like a computer simulation than real life at the time.

Siggi: “It’s no secret that I was *** scared out of my mind. Like I have said many times, an 18 year old teenager doesn’t have any clue what he is doing. You’re not playing a fucking video game, you aren’t playing The Sims or Black… what is… what is the one, I don’t play video games and don’t know the names. Call of Duty?”

Reporter: “It’s actually damn good.”

Siggi: “OK! But what I mean is you don’t realize it. And that is the worst part, I still don’t comprehend it today. It wasn’t like we were publishing something in the school paper.”

Reporter: “No, what you published was the real deal.”

Siggi: “Exactly. And that’s what one doesn’t realize.”

Reporter: “But do you feel like you did something wrong by publishing these documents? Do you think it was wrong?” 

Siggi: “Hm. Today, I would say yes.

He elaborates, saying the entire thing felt unreal and more like a computer simulation than real life at the time.

Siggi: “It’s no secret that I was *** scared out of my mind. Like I have said many times, an 18 year old teenager doesn’t have any clue what he is doing. You’re not playing a fucking video game, you aren’t playing The Sims or Black… what is… what is the one, I don’t play video games and don’t know the names. Call of Duty?”

Reporter: “It’s actually damn good.”

Siggi: “OK! But what I mean is you don’t realize it. And that is the worst part, I still don’t comprehend it today. It wasn’t like we were publishing something in the school paper.”

Reporter: “No, what you published was the real deal.”

Siggi: “Exactly. And that’s what one doesn’t realize.”

Reporter: “But do you feel like you did something wrong by publishing these documents? Do you think it was wrong?” 

Siggi: “Hm. Today, I would say yes.

Convicted for sex crimes against minors

Apart from his well documented and extensive financial fraud against Wikileaks and many companies in Iceland, he has also been convicted of sex crimes against nine under-age boys who he deceived and coerced into giving him sexual favours. Five other similar cases were dropped due to lack of evidence. One of the victims committed suicide after prosecutors dropped charges specifically related to his abuse. Thordarson, who was diagnosed with sociopathy by a court-appointed psychiatrist, claims to be haunted by these events.

Reporter: “We are talking about a boy who felt like you had abused him.”

Siggi: “Yes.”

Reporter: “His case was dropped.”

Siggi: “Yes.”

Reporter: “He was denied justice.”

Siggi: “Indeed.”

Reporter: “He then commits suicide. I’m not saying you are solely responsible for that but you do bear some responsibility.”

Siggi: “I know that. Believe me, I know. 100%. I even tried to talk to the state prosecutor and asked, for sake of argument, if this case could be addressed to bring it to a close. They said no.”  

Reporter: “Do you think you should have been convicted on the five charges that were dropped?”

Siggi: “Well, some of those cases that were dropped were just ridiculous. One of them was about a message I sent to someone on MSN asking if he wanted to have sex. But the boy who killed himself, his case should have gone forward.”

Reporter: “You made extravagant promises to him, you don’t remember? You promised him a monthly salary of a million króna [$7.800]. All he had to do was sleep with you.”

Siggi: “Yeah.”

Reporter: “And if he didn’t want to sleep with you any more he could keep the money, you’d sign a contract to that effect. You remember this?”

Siggi: “Yes.”

Reporter: “You were bullshitting him, you didn’t have that kind of money.”

Siggi: “No, but it was still just prostitution. That’s what it is, legally speaking.”

Reporter: “I didn’t ask about the legal definition.”

Siggi: “But according to my conviction that’s…”

Reporter: “I know that. But I’m asking how you feel about this, personally.”

Siggi: “Right now? I think it’s ridiculous. 

Reporter: “This goes beyond prostitution, doesn’t it? I don’t mean in the legal sense, I’m just talking about how it feels on a personal level. You pressuring this young boy, who was saving up to buy himself a flat. 

Reporter: “I mean, you promised him a computer, which you did indeed provide. But, I mean, you are pressuring him a great deal and he’s not even gay.” 

Siggi: “No, but he had the choice to say no.”

Reporter: “He did say no.”

Siggi: “OK.”

Reporter: “Yet you continued.”

Siggi: “OK. That’s how you hit on people, ya know?”

Read original article in Stundin

Jailing of Assange: the End of Press Freedom

Online discussion live streamed 5th September 2021 Journalist Support Committee (JSC) Cordially invite you to join our online discussion in solidarity with unlawfully imprisoned Journalist Julian Assange titled: Jailing of Assange: the End of Press Freedom 🗣 keynote Speakers: 👤DR DEEPA DRIVER Trade Unionists, Academic 👤 NIKI KONSTANTINIDOU Barrister and Solicitor 👤 RICHARD LAHUIS Photojournalist 👤 TAYLOR HUDAK Journalist 👤 DANIEL O’BRIEN Moderator ⏰ Sunday … Continue reading “Jailing of Assange: the End of Press Freedom”

Online discussion live streamed 5th September 2021

Journalist Support Committee (JSC) Cordially invite you to join our online discussion in solidarity with unlawfully imprisoned Journalist Julian Assange titled:

Jailing of Assange: the End of Press Freedom

🗣 keynote Speakers:

👤DR DEEPA DRIVER Trade Unionists, Academic

👤 NIKI KONSTANTINIDOU Barrister and Solicitor

👤 RICHARD LAHUIS Photojournalist

👤 TAYLOR HUDAK Journalist

👤 DANIEL O’BRIEN Moderator

⏰ Sunday 05 September 2021, 18:00 PM London time

📡 The conference will be live-Streamed on the following YouTube channel, https://www.youtube.com/c/JSCPRESS

➡️ Follow us on Facebook for past and forthcoming events, https://www.facebook.com/JSCPRESS/

Thank you for your support and for sharing our event.

Yaser Al-Sayegh ( General Secretary)
email: yaser@journalistsupport.net