Julian Assange: the Price of Truth

You must resist. You can resist. British police came into the embassy and arrested Julian.

This is one example of many, many acts of persecution and deliberate torture of Julian. I felt there was danger. The only right decision!

The right decision! I'm all right. I'm here with you.

The concern for us, Julian's family and friends, is that Julian is not here with us. Free, free Julian Assange! Free, free Julian Assange!

Free, free Julian Assange! Many millions of people have benefited immensely from the publications of WikiLeaks and Julian. If you just want to take one example, it's the Collateral Murder.

when the helicopter pilot and the gunner murdered these people. This is a war crime, and yet Julian has to be extradited for reporting a war crime. Free, free Julian Assange!

Free, free Julian Assange! If Assange is extradited to the United States it will put a strain on investigative journalism as we know it. For me, what's at stake is the freedom of the press, the freedom to access information, and to practice independent journalism, and that disturbs the power.

It's a vindictive persecution, which is an attack on press freedom worldwide. It should be fought by all means. The story of WikiLeaks begins in the middle of the war in Iraq with a handful of hackers and a few journalists.

They quickly made the US military's worst nightmare a reality by revealing a classified video to the world. When I first saw it, actually, it didn't have that much impact on me. I didn't know where it was, when it was, what the circumstances were, who these people were, et cetera.

It was only by following the path through the thing and seeing how relaxed and innocent most of the people were in the video that the carnage then became so outrageous. The video is complex. To better decipher it, the founder of WikiLeaks and his team moved to Reykjavik, the capital of Iceland.

They rented a discreet house they called the bunker. It's July 2007, an Apache helicopter flies over a neighborhood in Baghdad. The onboard camera spots a group of Iraqis on the ground.

Two of them are carrying weapons. The pilot, in radio contact with his base, requests permission to fire. We have five to six individuals with AK-47s.

Request permission to engage. Once I started discovering more and more details, this is when it became more emotional. To understand that, yes, this person was a journalist for Reuters, and this was a driver from Reuters.

Among the victims, WikiLeaks identifies Saeed Chmagh, a Reuters assistant driver and photographer Namir Noor-Eldeen. The helicopter pilot sees Namir and Saeed as insurgents and instantly decides that the cameras are weapons. -We've got a guy with an RPG.

-Firing? This was a death sentence for those guys. Light them all up.

Come on, fire. Keep shooting. Keep shooting.

The hotel is a few steps. Crazyhorse, One-Eight. Look at those dead bastards.

A few minutes later, the nature of the incident changes. The mission becomes a war crime. A black van approaches to assist the wounded.

Inside, there are no combatants, just two men with two children. The pilot makes up an imminent threat and requests permission to fire again. Crazyhorse, One-Eight, seeking permission to engage.

I see him picking up the wounded. I'm trying to get permission to engage. Come on, let us shoot.

Bushmaster 7, roger, engage. Come on. Clear.

Clear, we are engaged. -Coming around, clear. -Roger.

Look at that, right through the windshield. On the ground, corpses are everywhere. The helicopter then captures the arrival of a group of soldiers on film.

Among them is Ethan McCord. This is me here. I was one of about six who were dismounted at the time, and I'm running up onto the scene.

I'd never seen anything like that before. I saw on the corner what appeared to have been three men. They were completely destroyed by the 30-millimeter rounds.

It almost, to me, didn't seem real. It kind of seemed like something that you'd see out of a bad horror movie. The soldier realizes the severity of the incident as he approaches the van.

He locates two wounded people, a four-year-old girl, and a ten-year-old boy. I originally thought that the boy was deceased. because he had a wound to the right side of his head, and he wasn't moving.

When I went back out to the van, he made a labored breath movement. That's when I started screaming that the boy was alive. The boy's alive.

I grabbed him and started running into the Bradley, which is now… At this point, he looked up at me, and I looked down at him. I told him it'd be okay, I have you. Don't worry, it's going to be okay.

His eyes rolled back into his head. At that point, I thought that he possibly had just died in my arms. After that day, I couldn't justify what I was doing in Iraq anymore.

I became very angry with the war, the death and destruction of innocent people. That's not what I joined the military for. On April 5th, 2010, WikiLeaks published the video online.

The public discovers the true horror of this war. In Baghdad, the families of the victims learn of what happened. The man driving the van died, but the boy saved by Ethan McCord survived.

We just came from my uncle's house. We were going to school. Who were you helping?

The wounded. We were going to transport them. Why were you there that day?

Good afternoon, I'm Dylan Ratigan. Breaking news this afternoon. A shocking graphic video from Iraq apparently shows U.

S. troops gunning down innocent civilians. I'd just got done dropping my kids off at school back in April 2010.

I went home, grabbed coffee, sat down on the couch, and turned on the news, and there I was, running across the screen of my television, carrying a child. I knew immediately what it was, and it felt like a huge slap in the face. I had spent so much time trying to forget that incident.

and then here it was, being pushed in my face again. Ethan McCord was demobilized in 2010. Since then, he has been an anti-war activist.

The Collateral Murder release was very important. The video is iconic. It's symbolic.

It was a stunning testimony of a war crime. There was no question about it. People saw with their own eyes what the war entailed.

WikiLeaks probably can't go without criticism, but WikiLeaks revolutionized access to information. WikiLeaks has allowed the revelation of war crimes committed by the US Army. They probably would not have been revealed without WikiLeaks.

WikiLeaks explodes on international media. Many people are now interested in these faces, Julian Assange and one of the founders of the project. WikiLeaks is financed by contributions from private people.

$200,000 for operational costs. It was built in a way that whistleblowers remain anonymous to the project itself. Whenever something was received, it was not clear where it came from.

The whistleblower should feel secure in a way that if he feels something should be out in public, there is no instance that is then judging about his feelings. WikiLeaks grants total anonymity to all its sources. Just one month after the video was broadcast, the US Army arrested a young soldier not far from Baghdad.

His name is Bradley Manning. He spends his days filing military documents and is suspected of having leaked the video. Bradley Manning is a young 22-year-old Army intelligence specialist, only a couple of years in the Army.

He felt that there were operations going on. He felt that there had been civilian deaths and other things about war that the American people and the world should know about. The question is, how was he able to download all this information without drawing suspicion to himself?

In fact, he told people apparently, that when he was downloading this sensitive information onto a CD, he was actually listening to Lady Gaga. It wasn't true, but that's what he told people. They said, "Oh, that's fine.

" "Now we understand what he's why he's spending so, so much time," "why it's taking so long for him to do whatever he's doing. " With high levels of clearance, Bradley Manning downloads millions of confidential documents, military reports, diplomatic cables, strategy memos about Iraq and also Afghanistan. Bradley Manning first offers his documents to the Washington Post and The New York Times, who don't respond.

Then, he contacted WikiLeaks. Alone, the soldier is in a vulnerable position. He chats with Adrian Lamo, a young hacker, telling him everything.

Unfazed by the circumstances, Adrian Lamo reports Bradley Manning to the FBI, a move he explained during a meeting with other hackers. What I was doing at that time is, what I do believe, private first class Manning was doing, which is acting one's conscience. In that case, I felt compelled.

Compelled, I don't believe, is too strong a word. Bradley Manning is supported by some activists. However, it's little compared to the firepower of conservative commentators.

Hi, I'm Bill O'Reilly, thanks for watching us tonight. There are traitors in America. That's the subject of this evening's Talking Points Memo.

Whoever leaked all those State Department documents to the WikiLeaks website is a traitor and should be executed or put in prison for life. Whoever in our government leaked that information is guilty of treason. Anything less than execution is too kind of a penalty.

Bradley Manning is incarcerated in a high-security military prison. During his trial, the soldier admits to leaking documents to alert the public. He is convicted of espionage and theft.

Thirty-five years behind bars. That is the sentence for this man, Bradley Manning, the US soldier convicted of the biggest breach of classified data… The fate of Bradley Manning does not prevent WikiLeaks from continuing its affairs. The site is now associated with international press, including The Guardian.

In the property of the news giant, a headquarters is set up to analyze over 90,000 documents, this time about Afghanistan. We set up a secret office on the 4th floor of this building that nobody else was allowed in, and we had this tiny little international bunker or war room. Essentially, what we found was there were some 92,000 documents.

These are incident logs, war reports in Afghanistan, and to some parts along the Afghan-Pakistan border. We did a lot of work on going through these logs, trying to decode them. A lot of them were written in an almost impenetrable military jargon full of abbreviations and acronyms.

One of the main findings that we came up with these documents was that the Pakistani military and intelligence service, the ISI, closely supports some of the Taliban and other insurgent activities in Afghanistan as a way of keeping the coalition forces off balance. Whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks does it again. Last time, it was Iraq.

This time, it's Afghanistan. The discoveries make the front page of the New York Times, the Spiegel, and, of course, The Guardian, by doing so validating the work of WikiLeaks. This is the Guardian from this morning.

Fourteen pages about this topic. Also concurrently in the Spiegel, 17 pages. The real story of this material is that it's war.

It's one damn thing after another. Washington is inevitably furious. The United States strongly condemns the illegal disclosure of classified information.

In the documents published by WikiLeaks, There are some names of American Army collaborators that appear. In Afghanistan or Iraq, the military uses translators. In the eyes of the insurgents, these men are traitors.

Disclosing their identity puts their lives at risk. Good afternoon. At the Pentagon, WikiLeaks is denounced as a criminal organization.

The battlefield consequences of the release of these documents are potentially severe and dangerous. Mr Assange can say whatever he likes about the greater good he thinks he and his source are doing, but the truth is, they might already have on their hands the blood of some young soldier or that of an Afghan family. It was, of course, unfortunate that some names were published there, but it has been overplayed quite a bit with very dramatic and ridiculous words from the Pentagon that WikiLeaks might have blood on its hands.

That coming from an organization that has quite a bit of blood on its hands is almost hypocritical. As of now, there have been no reported incidents of anyone who has been hurt by this information. What do you expect at the end of the day with this material?

I hope it creates disincentives for engaging in immoral conduct in war, disincentives for engaging in war crimes in Iraq and other places. It gives the victims of the war in Iraq a sense of justice, a better understanding of how war goes, and how war goes wrong. Possibly the most valuable thing to come out of it.

WikiLeaks is releasing one story after another for Afghanistan and Iraq. The media world is asking the same question, who is this enigmatic Julian Assange? The founder of WikiLeaks, covers the front pages of magazines.

Julian Assange is taking the world by storm, which has proven to irritate his colleagues. Julian's approach was to rush things and blast out those few big leaks… And concentrate only on those leaks. Yes, because they are what gives you the most popularity, and that's not the approach.

I'm not into being popular. It was the approach if you want to build a personality, become Time Magazine Man of the Year, or something like this, but it's not the right approach with respect to the ideals of this organization. -That's enough.

-Okay. For Assange's colleague, it's a betrayal of WikiLeaks's ideals. The two men clash through online conversation, of course.

He suspended me for being disloyal and insubordinate and stuff like that. This is some kind of weird military terminology that he uses himself to deal with the people he's working with. -You felt betrayed?

-Yes. Because I did not betray him and never ever did I betray WikiLeaks. Daniel Domscheit-Berg leaves WikiLeaks in 2010.

Criticized by his friends, Julian Assange is hated by his enemies, who sometimes call for his execution publicly. The man can't leak stuff. This guy's a traitor, a treasonous, and illegally shoot the son of a… I think Assange should be assassinated.

I think Obama should put out a contract and maybe use a drone or something. These are 120 people headed up by a general who did nothing else but target us. Defense Intelligence Agency and FBI internally called the WikiLeaks war room.

In the United States, at the moment, there is an attempt to get an espionage prosecution against me and other people in the US Intelligence Community. Plus the military is worth maybe 1. 5 million people, so 120 is actually not so bad.

Perhaps a bit overconfident of Julian Assange, since 2010, the American authorities are, in fact, seeking to arrest him, and an opportunity presents itself in Sweden. In the summer of 2010, two young women accused Julian Assange of having consensual but unprotected sex. The press takes the case and speaks of a suspicion of rape.

The judge opens an investigation. Without proof, the proceedings are first canceled, but it is surprisingly revived. Julian Assange accuses WikiLeaks of political maneuvering.

It appears to be highly irregular, and some kind of legal circus. It's clearly a smear campaign, and that who is behind this, we do not know. Behind closed doors, however, Julian Assange speaks of a destabilization operation aimed at his extradition to the United States.

The more you look at the case, the more you see what happened. Particularly in Sweden, where he was accused of rape, the more we become aware of the extent of the manipulation of the fact that there is an intelligence service company trying to get him extradited to the United States. Even more, he has been portrayed as evil, which is also the work of intelligence services.

British police have arrested the founder of the WikiLeaks website, Julian Assange. The WikiLeaks founder has been arrested by British police over sexual assault claims in Sweden. In December 2010, British police issued a Swedish arrest warrant.

Imprisoned in London for a week, Julian Assange denies all accusations of rape. For a year and a half, he does everything in his power to not be handed over to Sweden, which is, according to him, the first step of his extradition to the United States. When all legal remedies were exhausted, Julian sought refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy, and they decided that he had a reasonable fear of extradition to the United States, which granted him a safe haven in the Ecuadorian embassy.

The Assange case mobilized the most acclaimed lawyers in the world. Among them, a historical figure of Spanish justice, former magistrate Baltasar Garzon. He coordinates, free of charge, the defense of the WikiLeaks founder.

Why did Assange choose the Embassy of Ecuador? It was a popular government. Clearly opposed to the expansionist policies of both the judicial and economic spheres of the united States.

Ecuador was one of those Latin American countries that could stand firmly against the United States without fear. In June 2012, Julian Assange became the world's most protected political refugee barricaded in this Victorian house in central London. I asked President Obama to do the right thing.

The United States must renounce its witch hunt against WikiLeaks. What appeared to be temporary will continue on for seven long years. Julian Assange receives many visitors, lawyers, ministers, and journalists, always in the confines of four walls.

It's a picture that was taken in a room that Julian Assange used in the evenings. I remember having dinner in this room on these armchairs with him. When you say embassy, it makes you think of a hotel.

In reality, the Ecuadorian Embassy in London is very modest. It was small. It was certainly bigger than a prison cell, but he was in prison.

The room he lived in was impenetrable. Cardboard boxes had been put on the windows. You couldn't see anything from the outside.

In other words, he spent years without seeing the sun, without any possibility of going out. He was placed in a state of permanent psychological tension. His life was very much like that of an inmate without a yard.

I often met with Julian Assange about twice a month. At that time, Julian was obsessed. He thought that someone was trying to spy on him to record him and all his visitors to the point that we, lawyers, thought he was over-paranoid.

Obsessed with his safety, locked inside, Julian Assange and his team keep on working. In 2015, new discoveries made the front page of French papers. Chirac, Sarkozy, and Holland are being listened to by the US.

We'll return to the beginning of the paper on WikiLeaks' latest findings. For at least six years, between 2006 and 2012, three French presidents were reportedly bugged by the NSA, the American intelligence services. In the United States, they are militarily occupying what we had previously thought of as a civilian space.

The essential ingredients of a transnational totalitarian dystopia have been built. The engine, the wheels, and the chassis have been built. The key is in the ignition, and it's just a matter of turning this on.

It has been turned on for some people. WikiLeaks is an example of it spreading even to a media organization. Julian Assange's obsession, the extreme power of America.

The 2016 presidential campaign will give him the opportunity to play a leading role once again. Ladies and gentlemen, I am officially running for president of the United States, and we are going to make our country great again. America can't succeed unless you succeed.

That is why I am running for president of the United States. Clinton versus Trump. Their campaigns promised to be brutal.

Opposed to Hillary Clinton since 2010, WikiLeaks has chosen its side. An internal message sent by Julian Assange himself, leaving no doubt about his opinion. What we are drawing attention to is the amazing transformation of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party into being the national security party and the national security candidate.

In the American liberal press, in falling over themselves, to defend Hillary Clinton are erecting a demon that is going to put nooses around everyone's necks as soon as you wins the election, which she is almost certainly going to do. In the spring of 2016, tens of thousands of emails from Hillary Clinton and her collaborators were published online. The most sensitive documents didn't come from WikiLeaks.

Hillary Clinton may have violated federal recordkeeping rules. They are revealed by the so-called GUCCIFER 2. 0.

When GUCCIFER appears on the web, WikiLeaks partners with the mysterious source to get more information. On June 22nd, 2016, WikiLeaks sends him this private message on Twitter. New message.

The 6th of July. "Send us any new material [stolen from the DNC] here to review. " "It'll have a higher impact than what you're doing.

" "If you have anything Hillary-related, we want it in the next two days," "preferably because the DNC is approaching. " US investigators claim to have traced the trail of the hackers behind this fictitious character, allegedly the Russian Secret Service. Could WikiLeaks be complicit in an attempt to destabilize the situation?

It is a wrongful depiction. Julian has stated that the source of the information was neither Russian nor a state entity. Where the material came from doesn't change the fact of the material.

I mean, you get information, and you analyze the information, and you decide to publish if it's newsworthy. That is the core of a journalistic practice. Saying that WikiLeaks or Julian is some friend of Russian interests or follows Russian interests is absurd.

It doesn't hold up any scrutiny. There is one, however, who revels in the news about Hillary Clinton. I'll tell you, this WikiLeaks stuff is unbelievable.

WikiLeaks, WikiLeaks. That came out on WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks, I love WikiLeaks.

Destabilized, the Democratic candidate retorts as best she can in a debate with Donald Trump. The Kremlin, meaning Putin and the Russian government, are directing the attacks, the hacking of American accounts to influence our election, and WikiLeaks is part of that, as are other sites. In November 2016, Donald Trump was elected president of the United States.

I pledge to every citizen of our land that I'll be president for all Americans, and this is so important to me. President Trump did not remain pro-WikiLeaks for too long. In 2017, the site published new findings from the CIA, and consequently, his administration's attitude towards WikiLeaks changed dramatically.

We at the CIA find the celebration of entities like WikiLeaks to be both perplexing and deeply troubling because while we do our best to quietly collect information on those who pose a real threat to our country, individuals such as Julian Assange seek to use that information to make a name for themselves. It's time to call out WikiLeaks for what it is, a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia. In France, suspicions have been raised that WikiLeaks might have joined forces with Russia to destabilize the French presidential elections.

I wish to become your president. The president of all the people of France. A president who protects, transforms, and builds in the face of the threat of nationalists.

My dear compatriots. The end of Emmanuel Macron's campaign at headquarters. Hands are full preparing for the second round of the presidential election, but a rumor is out.

The inboxes of certain En Marche collaborators have been hacked. It's May the 5th, 2017, 7:30 PM. Towards the end of the day, we're starting to get rumors on Twitter.

They say that there are things that are going to get released. Then, we talk about the first elements, and at one point, I see the download link being shared. I open it, and I see that it's actually emails from several people in the campaign.

Several thousand documents and emails from the En Marche campaign were extensively hacked, broadcast on the Internet and social networks less than 48 hours before the second round of the presidential election. The emails are posted on a website called 4chan by an unknown source. One and a half hours later, WikiLeaks publishes this tweet referring to the documents.

This message makes MacronLeaks the front page of the international press. The En Marche movement has been the victim of a massive and coordinated hack this evening. Emails of Emmanuel Macron now surfacing everywhere online.

It comes just hours before… Thousands of emails, but most with little or no information of interest, and sometimes even fake documents. This is obviously a campaign of destabilization. WikiLeaks is useful when it is used to reveal information that one wants to hide and that allows democracy to exist better, to function better.

When you publish information, the personal, friendly, loving correspondence of a person onto a search engine you are no longer in the pursuit of the original mission of democracy. This invasion of privacy of the one who finds 10 years of these published e-mails this act is unforgivable. This is where Wikileaks strayed from its role.

No evidence was ever found about WikiLeaks' involvement in this operation. They did not publish anything before Election Day, and the French police found nothing on WikiLeaks nor formally identified the hacker, but Russian hackers are heavily suspected. As of now, Julian Assange has been living locked up for five years.

A rare look inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London, a private security firm that allegedly spied on Assange during his asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. In a surveillance video obtained by the Spanish newspaper El País, he's seen in shorts and a tank top skateboarding. Assange's espionage began in December 2017.

The head of the Spanish security company that was monitoring him decided to replace the video cameras with an audio and video control system. He also had microphones placed under the fire extinguishers in the main hall where Assange welcomed all his visitors. Finally, he asks these employees to bug the women's bathroom.

Since Julian didn't trust anyone, some of our conversations took place in the women's bathroom. Well, even there, they had placed a microphone. Initially, the purpose of this Spanish company was not to spy on Julian Assange, but to protect him and the embassy from outside surveillance.

Then, a major political change occurred. This took place at the time of the handover of power between President Raphael Correa and Lenin Moreno, and we were all convinced that, in this matter, Moreno would follow in the footsteps of his predecessor, but when he came to power, he did exactly the opposite. This is obviously the result of pressure from the United States.

It is from that moment that started, as we will discover later a massive surveillance operation, at all levels of Julian, in his most intimate moments with all his guests, and of course, with his lawyers. The sponsors were, in fact, trying to find out what we were doing, what we were saying, what our strategy was. In short, they were watching everything.

Julian Assange is monitored 24 hours a day. On the job, a small Spanish security company, UC Global. His movements, his conversations, everything is recorded.

Everything is noted and reported minute by minute. Here, the meeting between the client, Julian Assange, and his lawyers, including Baltasar Garzón. At 11:20 AM, the client, his wife Stella, and his attorney head to the ladies' bathroom for a meeting.

Here is the man who manages UC Global, David Morales, a former marine commander of the Spanish Army. David Morales is the brains and the leader of this small security company. In the documents we're in possession of and have published, Morales makes it clear to his employers that all the information can be traced back to "his American enemies.

" That he has crossed over to the dark side by working for foreign intelligence services. It can be said that Morales sold his information to a North American intelligence service. We cannot say which one exactly.

There is no formal, journalistic, or judicial proof, but the suspicions, which implicate the United States, are very important, very important. For me and all lawyers, this is an operation run by the United States and its intelligence services. That is quite clear.

How is it possible that the state that granted Julian Assange political asylum could have given all this information to those responsible for his persecution, that is the United States? This is completely nonsensical and illegal. Thanks to the information provided by intelligence services, the United States now knows the details of Julian Assange's defense strategy to avoid his extradition.

In 2018, the founder of WikiLeaks is officially accused of espionage. American pressure on Ecuador is increasing. Julian Assange becomes a priority target.

On April the 11th, 2019, Ecuadorian President Lenin Moreno appeared on national television. Hello, Ecuador is a generous and open nation. Today, I confirm that Julian Assange's discourteous and aggressive behavior makes his asylum unsustainable and impossible.

Ecuador, sovereignly decides to put an end to the diplomatic asylum granted to Mr Assange in 2012. The government for everyone. The same day, the police arrested Julian Assange within the compound of the Ecuadorian Embassy.

The United States immediately called for his extradition. You must resist. You can resist.

After his removal from the embassy, Julian has been sent to a high-security prison in Belmarch, and placed in total isolation, so much that we are afraid of his mental balance. I went to visit him and his conditions of detention are really bad, terrible. Julian is disoriented, in solitary confinement 23 hours a day.

He can only go out for one hour a day. Alone in a small courtyard, without any possibility of communication. We denounced these conditions for his safety.

In February 2020, the British judicial system got involved for the first time in Julian Assange's extradition request. His supporters gathered, and his father was, of course, present. -Hello, John.

-Good morning. Did you have a chance to speak to Julian last night? No, I didn't have a chance, but I'll come out and say something.

I'll just go to the hearing first, and then I'll come out. -Is that cool with you? -That's fine.

-Thank you. -That's cool. -Good morning, everyone.

-Good morning. Good morning. Thank you very much, sir.

Thank you. Exceptionally, the hearings take place inside the prison. What was very impressive in that courtroom was the fact that he was at the far end of the courtroom, behind glass treated as an extremely dangerous terrorist, and very far away from the heart of the debate, as if he couldn't participate.

You could see a man facing a judicial mechanism that obviously controls him. There was a tense atmosphere. We were waiting, and of course, we were supportive of Julian Assange We could see him, he seemed to be doing well, and the truth is that he has impressive strength of character.

I remember this prosecutor who talks about the people put in danger by Assange, but is unable to name one. There are a number of charges against Assange, that end up being without proof, without relation to reality. Free, free Julian Assange!

Among Julian Assange's unwavering supporters is Bradley Manning, now Chelsea Manning. Good afternoon, everyone. Two months ago, the federal government… The former soldier spent a total of seven years behind bars, released, incarcerated, then released again, the justice system hopes to force her to testify.

Facing jail again, potentially today, doesn't change my stance. The prosecutors are placing me in an impossible position. Go to jail or in the alternative, forgoing my principles, the strong positions that I have, that I hold dear.

It doesn't matter what it is or what the case is, I'm just not going to comply or cooperate. I think that's it. All right, thank you, everybody.

These statements will get Chelsea Manning, once again, several months in jail. Her determination does not pacify the Assange case. If extradited to the United States, the founder of WikiLeaks risks 175 years in prison, 175 years for publishing information of public interest.

There is only one journalist who is detained and held in prison for doing his job as a journalist in Western Europe, and that's Julian Assange. You can criticize Assange, his personality, the way he conducts himself, but if there's one thing you can't criticize, it's his contribution to freedom of information. What is central to the procedure is this contribution to journalism, and that's what makes it so dangerous.

Free, free Julian Assange! Free, free Julian Assange! Breaking news out of London this morning.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange cannot be extradited to the United States. On January 4th, 2021, the British courts ruled that due to Assange's psychological state, he would not be extradited. A half-hearted victory for his supporters as the United States is still not giving up.

The lawyers for the US government indicated they would appeal the decision. They should not, and there should be a call out and pressure on the US side to drop the appeal, to say enough is enough. Julian Assange is not in the clear just yet.

The WikiLeaks founder is still facing extradition to the United States. Free, free! The content of the extradition request from the United States has given us the opportunity to demonstrate that his case is nothing more than political persecution.

What's at stake for Assange's extradition is what is at stake for a person, for an individual. It's what's at stake for the social function of journalism, and therefore for the right to information for every citizen. Free, free, free Assange!

Free, free, free Assange! Free, free, free Assange! Free, free, free Assange!

Free, free, free Assange! Free, free, free Assange! Free, free, free Assange!

Free, free, free Assange! Free, free, free Assange! Free, free, free Assange!

Free, free, free Assange! Free, free, free Assange! Free, free, free Assange!

Free, free, free Assange!