Mostrando las entradas con la etiqueta London. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando las entradas con la etiqueta London. Mostrar todas las entradas

domingo, diciembre 19, 2010

Michael Moore: Why I Posted Bail for Julian Assange

Yesterday I put up $20,000 of my own money to help bail WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange out of jail. Here's why.

Yesterday, in the Westminster Magistrates Court in London, the lawyers for WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange presented to the judge a document from me stating that I have put up $20,000 of my own money to help bail Mr. Assange out of jail.

Furthermore, I am publicly offering the assistance of my website, my servers, my domain names and anything else I can do to keep WikiLeaks alive and thriving as it continues its work to expose the crimes that were concocted in secret and carried out in our name and with our tax dollars.

We were taken to war in Iraq on a lie. Hundreds of thousands are now dead. Just imagine if the men who planned this war crime back in 2002 had had a WikiLeaks to deal with. They might not have been able to pull it off. The only reason they thought they could get away with it was because they had a guaranteed cloak of secrecy. That guarantee has now been ripped from them, and I hope they are never able to operate in secret again.

So why is WikiLeaks, after performing such an important public service, under such vicious attack? Because they have outed and embarrassed those who have covered up the truth. The assault on them has been over the top:

- Sen. Joe Lieberman says WikiLeaks "has violated the Espionage Act."

- The New Yorker's George Packer calls Assange "super-secretive, thin-skinned, [and] megalomaniacal."

- Sarah Palin claims he's "an anti-American operative with blood on his hands" whom we should pursue "with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders."

- Democrat Bob Beckel (Walter Mondale's 1984 campaign manager) said about Assange on Fox: "A dead man can't leak stuff ... there's only one way to do it: illegally shoot the son of a bitch."

- Republican Mary Matalin says "he's a psychopath, a sociopath ... He's a terrorist."

- Rep. Peter A. King calls WikiLeaks a "terrorist organization."

And indeed they are! They exist to terrorize the liars and warmongers who have brought ruin to our nation and to others. Perhaps the next war won't be so easy because the tables have been turned -- and now it's Big Brother who's being watched ... by us!

WikiLeaks deserves our thanks for shining a huge spotlight on all this. But some in the corporate-owned press have dismissed the importance of WikiLeaks ("they've released little that's new!") or have painted them as simple anarchists ("WikiLeaks just releases everything without any editorial control!"). WikiLeaks exists, in part, because the mainstream media has failed to live up to its responsibility. The corporate owners have decimated newsrooms, making it impossible for good journalists to do their job. There's no time or money anymore for investigative journalism. Simply put, investors don't want those stories exposed. They like their secrets kept ... as secrets.

I ask you to imagine how much different our world would be if WikiLeaks had existed 10 years ago. Take a look at this photo. That's Mr. Bush about to be handed a "secret" document on August 6th, 2001. Its heading read: "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US." And on those pages it said the FBI had discovered "patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings." Mr. Bush decided to ignore it and went fishing for the next four weeks.

But if that document had been leaked, how would you or I have reacted? What would Congress or the FAA have done? Was there not a greater chance that someone, somewhere would have done something if all of us knew about bin Laden's impending attack using hijacked planes?

But back then only a few people had access to that document. Because the secret was kept, a flight school instructor in San Diego who noticed that two Saudi students took no interest in takeoffs or landings, did nothing. Had he read about the bin Laden threat in the paper, might he have called the FBI? (Please read this essay by former FBI Agent Coleen Rowley, Time's 2002 co-Person of the Year, about her belief that had WikiLeaks been around in 2001, 9/11 might have been prevented.)

Or what if the public in 2003 had been able to read "secret" memos from Dick Cheney as he pressured the CIA to give him the "facts" he wanted in order to build his false case for war? If a WikiLeaks had revealed at that time that there were, in fact, no weapons of mass destruction, do you think that the war would have been launched -- or rather, wouldn't there have been calls for Cheney's arrest?

Openness, transparency -- these are among the few weapons the citizenry has to protect itself from the powerful and the corrupt. What if within days of August 4th, 1964 -- after the Pentagon had made up the lie that our ship was attacked by the North Vietnamese in the Gulf of Tonkin -- there had been a WikiLeaks to tell the American people that the whole thing was made up? I guess 58,000 of our soldiers (and 2 million Vietnamese) might be alive today.

Instead, secrets killed them.

For those of you who think it's wrong to support Julian Assange because of the sexual assault allegations he's being held for, all I ask is that you not be naive about how the government works when it decides to go after its prey. Please -- never, ever believe the "official story." And regardless of Assange's guilt or innocence (see the strange nature of the allegations here), this man has the right to have bail posted and to defend himself. I have joined with filmmakers Ken Loach and John Pilger and writer Jemima Khan in putting up the bail money -- and we hope the judge will accept this and grant his release today.

Might WikiLeaks cause some unintended harm to diplomatic negotiations and U.S. interests around the world? Perhaps. But that's the price you pay when you and your government take us into a war based on a lie. Your punishment for misbehaving is that someone has to turn on all the lights in the room so that we can see what you're up to. You simply can't be trusted. So every cable, every email you write is now fair game. Sorry, but you brought this upon yourself. No one can hide from the truth now. No one can plot the next Big Lie if they know that they might be exposed.

And that is the best thing that WikiLeaks has done. WikiLeaks, God bless them, will save lives as a result of their actions. And any of you who join me in supporting them are committing a true act of patriotism. Period.

I stand today in absentia with Julian Assange in London and I ask the judge to grant him his release. I am willing to guarantee his return to court with the bail money I have wired to said court. I will not allow this injustice to continue unchallenged.

P.S. You can read the statement I filed today in the London court here.

P.P.S. If you're reading this in London, please go support Julian Assange and WikiLeaks at a demonstration at 1 PM today, Tuesday the 14th, in front of the Westminster court.

Arianna Huffington: Assange Is No Terrorist



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CXAiOmAJKs

domingo, diciembre 12, 2010

WikiLeaks founder Assange says Pentagon plans prosecution

Reuters – Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, which has made public about 500,000 classified U.S. files on the …

STOCKHOLM (Reuters) – WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who angered Washington by releasing secret cables, said in a documentary on Sunday he faced prosecution by the United States and was disappointed with how Swedish justice had been abused.

Assange has been remanded in custody in Britain after a European arrest warrant was issued by Sweden, which wants to question Assange about allegations made by two women of sexual crimes. He has denied the allegations.

"I came to Sweden as a refugee publisher involved with an extraordinary publishing fight with the Pentagon, where people were being detained and there is an attempt to prosecute me for espionage," Assange said in an interview in the documentary, aired on Swedish public television.

"So I am unhappy and disappointed with how the Swedish justice system has been abused," the 39-year-old Australian added in the documentary, which was made before his arrest.

Assange faces a fresh British hearing on December 14. His Swedish lawyer has said he will fight extradition to Sweden.

One of his British lawyers, Jennifer Robinson, told ABC News in London on Friday that a U.S. indictment of Assange was imminent, but the report offered no further details or comment by Robinson why she believed charges were likely to be filed.

The U.S. Justice Department has been looking into a range of criminal charges, including violations of the 1917 Espionage Act, that could be filed in the WikiLeaks case involving the release of hundreds of confidential and classified U.S. diplomatic cables.

(Reporting by Patrick Lannin)

domingo, abril 05, 2009

El Gran Circo De Londres


Meses atrás la formidable maquinaria propagandística del imperio alimentaba la ilusión de que la reunión del G-20 en Londres le daría la estocada final a la crisis. Sin embargo, a medida que se acercaba la fecha comenzaron a oírse voces discordantes.

Nicolas Sarkozy y Angela Merkel lanzaron baldes de agua fría sobre el inminente cónclave y el anfitrión, el “progresista” británico Gordon Brown, aconsejó bajar las expectativas al paso que un número creciente de economistas críticos e historiadores advertían sobre lo fútil de la tentativa. Pese a ello los ilusionistas y malabaristas del sistema no dejaron de ensalzar la reunión de Londres y tratar de que las tibias medidas que allí se adoptasen fuesen interpretadas por el público como propuestas sensatas y efectivas para resolver la crisis.Como era de esperar, poco y nada concreto salió de la reunión. Y esto por varias razones. Primero, porque lo que con arrogancia e ignorancia inauditas algunos caracterizaron como Bretton Woods II ni siquiera se planteó la pregunta fundamental: ¿reformar para qué, con qué objeto? Al soslayarse el tema por omisión quedó establecido que el objetivo de las reformas no sería otro que el de volver a la situación anterior a la crisis. Esto supone que lo que la causó no fueron las contradicciones inherentes al sistema capitalista sino aquella “exuberante irracionalidad de los mercados” de la que se lamentaba Alan Greenspan, sin percatarse que el capitalismo es por naturaleza exuberantemente irracional y que esto no se debe a un defecto psicológico de los agentes económicos sino que tiene sus fundamentos en la esencia misma del modo de producción. Segundo: dado lo anterior no sorprende comprobar que el G-20 haya decidido fortalecer el papel del FMI para liderar los esfuerzos de la recuperación, siendo el principal autor intelectual de la crisis actual.El FMI ha sido, y continúa siendo, el principal vehículo ideológico y político para la imposición del neoliberalismo a escala planetaria. Es una tecnocracia perversa e inmoral que percibe honorarios exorbitantes (¡exentos del pago de impuestos!) y cuya pobreza intelectual la resumió muy bien Joseph Stiglitz cuando dijo que el FMI está poblado por “economistas de tercera formados en universidades de primera.” ¿Y de la mano de estos aprendices de brujos se piensa salir de la crisis más grave del sistema capitalista en toda su historia?No hay en esto un ápice de exageración: esta crisis es la manifestación externa de varias otras que irrumpen por primera vez: crisis energética, medioambiental, hídrica. Nada de esto había en la depresión de 1873-1896 o en la Gran Depresión de los años treinta. En su entrelazamiento estas crisis plantean un desafío de inéditas proporciones, frente al cual las recetas del FMI no harán sino profundizar los problemas hasta extremos insospechados. Tercero: dada esta situación el tema es demasiado grave para dejarlo en manos del G-20 y sus “expertos”. Por eso el presidente de la Asamblea General de la ONU, Miguel D’Escoto, dijo que lo que se necesitaba no era un G-20 sino un G-192, una cumbre de todos los países, y la convocó para Junio de este año. El G-20 trata de cooptar a varios países del Sur con la esperanza de robustecer el consenso para una estrategia gatopardista de “salida capitalista a la crisis del capitalismo”: cambiar algo para que nada cambie. Pero no hay posibilidad alguna de capear este temporal apelando a las recetas del FMI, y los países invitados a Londres, entre ellos la Argentina, lo mejor que podrían hacer es denunciar con serenidad pero con firmeza la inanidad de las medidas allí adoptadas y que dentro del capitalismo no habrá solución para nuestros pueblos ni para las amenazas que se ciernen sobre todas las formas de vida del planeta Tierra.

Foto: Gran Bretaña, Londres – Imagen oficial de los jefes de Estado presentes en la cumbre del G20. / Autor: Presidencia de la Nación

domingo, marzo 29, 2009

London Braces for More Protests Surrounding G20 Summit

Some 35,000 protesters have marched in London prior to next week's G-20 economic summit in the city.
They're demanding that world leaders protect workers' rights, improve aid for developing countries and take more action on climate change.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEPSO5gPZMA