Original Articles

Progressive Pakistani bloggers in support of Julian Assange

I endorse the following petition by the Reader Supported News (RSN) and express my dissatisfaction with the timing and the veracity of charges levelled against Julian Assange.

On behalf of progressive, anti-establishment Pakistani bloggers, I am writing this post as an expression of our full support for Julian Assange and his right to free speech. We commend his services towards exposing the neo-colonial Empire of the USA and the network of its stooges around the world in particular its military servants in Pakistan and monarchical servants in Saudi Arabia. (Abdul Nishapuri)


We here undersigned express our support for the work and integrity of Julian Assange. We express concern that the charges against the WikiLeaks founder appear too convenient both in terms of timing and the novelty of their nature.

We call for this modern media innovator, and fighter for human rights extraordinaire, to be afforded the same rights to defend himself before Swedish justice that all others similarly charged might expect, and that his liberty not be compromised as a courtesy to those governments whose truths he has revealed have embarrassed.

In earnest support of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange:

You can sign the petition at the following link:


In Support of Julian Assange
November 27th, 2010
Source: Thomas Davis

I have wrestled with this concept for some time; that of the full openness of Wikileaks; of publishing, without restraint, all of the materials they have. Wikileaks has put on the internet, for the entire world to see, so many state secrets and embarrassing documents that the world governments are virtually conspiring to silence him (bringing into reality the far-fetched fiction of novelists and psychotics). Is Julian Assange a visionary or an anarchist?

Many of his friends and supporters have abandoned him. He has been labeled a fugitive by Sweden for sex crimes – Sex crimes in Sweden!? – one of the only countries able to do so without it looking like retaliation for his postings. Julian Assange has been blamed for the suggested deaths of honorable patriots from leaked information of enormous quantities. He is a renegade in a modern world where such a notoriety is all but obsolete.

Yet, Julian Assange has stayed the course. He lives like a paranoid conspiracy theorist and alien abductionist combined into one neurotic soul – with good cause. The world is out to get him. The powers that be can’t silence him so they influence others to, they have made numerous imagined attempts to either make him unstable or appear so, to get him to question his own course, to get him to throw in the towel as not being worth the trouble.

I’ve read the articles damning his actions and their results. I’ve seen reports on some of his (supposed) results. I’ve felt the fear rise as I imagined being in his shoes (I don’t know how he does it). I’ve also felt the conviction with which he is empowered. Most of all I have tried to balance all the goods and evils of his work.

I decided against what he does as being a “good thing” for the world today. It took a while but that was the position I came to. And I don’t come to any position lightly.

One of my greatest angst of the day is that people take positions on every topic, from the guilt or innocence of the latest felon in the news to the agenda of congress or the White House, by listening to others’ opinions, whether it be columnists or talk show hosts. Rarely does any of the proletariat consider or even apprise themselves of the facts before forming an opinion or taking a position. Most of the average people in this country allow others to think for them. I point to the working class as the more educated tend to give more consideration to the facts but they too are subject to this lethargy of idealism just a bit less so.

But it kept at me, this basic concept which must be driving Julian to keep at it. I considered that we all need secrets and even need to tell lies at times. Much of these same fundamental ideas are the same as those advanced and propitiated in support of positions to stop his work. The hardest retorts are those that claim patriotic lives are lost, that good men and women serving their country are killed from his “childish idealism.”

I came to a point, in my considerations, where someday – I always love those “someday” arguments; their such a cop out – his views would be relevant. We imagine a perfect world, someday, where governments hold no secrets and actually existed for the good of the people, where kindness and brotherhood are more than words in poems and great quotes. As I indicated the problem with these someday arguments is that they are both an admission of what is right and an excuse for denying it.

With hesitation, I understood Julian Assange is doing the right thing. He is persisting on a course that most others would have abandoned long ago. Julian Assange is a true world changer, one of those great souls that are chastised in their own time. Some time in the future historians will look back at his efforts and mark him as one who had great affect on the course of history. Much is left to be written yet but he shall, will, and has inspired others to follow in his path. Even as those supporters of his jumped ship more boarded, albeit silently and without his knowledge, but on board they are. Julian has began writing a new book, one that has many volumes and one that will have many contributors. The time of governments keeping secrets has reached its peak and is now on a downward slope.

What is needed is more of those brave souls that broke the secrets to WikiLeaks. More from other countries, especially. I ask what if the leaks came from Iran, China, or any other of our world’s current antagonists instead of the US and its allies, what if the information was highly useful to our governements? Would the wave of opposition to Julian be so full spectrum? He would be a hero (and probably have been assassinated). By doing what he is doing he inspires others to break their codes of silence and expose the dirt that keeps them up at night.

Keeping WikiLeaks up and running gives new hope in Someday. Julian Assange is one person to finally ask the obvious question that’s been hanging right before our eyes and yet no one saw it, Why can’t someday be today?

About the author

Abdul Nishapuri


Click here to post a comment
  • Support Julian Assange and WikiLeaks
    by Bob Levin

    “The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy so monstrous they cannot believe it exists” – J. Edgar Hoover, Director of the FBI.

    WikiLeaks is bringing democracy to America and in this case, Julian Assange should be applauded for a genuine act of extreme patriotism and global humanitarianism. If Senator Lindsey Graham wants to prosecute someone, then charge Senator John McCain for voluntarily giving aid and comfort to the enemy during Vietnam by affording the NVC classified U.S. flightpath information that cost the lives of countless U.S. pilots and for his conspiracy in the cover-up of former President George H.W. Bush‘s clandestine order to test an aerial EMP radiation weapon from a refitted military A-6 Intruder jet-bomber over New York City that subsequently caused the murder of U.S. and Canadian citizens and McCain’s Senatorial Hearing that scapegoated a power company engineer with unwarranted responsibility for the massive regional power outage that resulted with the a pay-off of McCain’s military record being permanently sealed.

    Or charge the U.S. Department of Justice and Attorney General Holder for selective enforcement and the felonious non-prosecution of the many known culpable federal agents, administrators, jackals, and others who have been named by FBI, CIA and other government whistleblower patriots and the known criminal actors who have outed my clandestine security clearance multiple times to serve as the government’s passive sanction for my assassination.

    Or charge the former Bush White House for causing me a decade of torture and terrorism in political retribution under their threats to remain silent or face the government’s “invention” of a criminal charge after being permanently disabled from two traumas incurred in the line of duty during national service in the FBI and after becoming a whistleblower patriot. Charge the Bush cabal for ordering a U.S. Special Forces team to not neutralize Osama bin Laden and then classifying the mission to gag the truth from being told. Attorney General Holder refuses to give me written permission to name the culpable clandestine agents, is therefore complicit and should step-down.

    Or Senator Graham; I use to frequently have lunch with one of your Ratpublican counterparts and a former Watergate burglar in South Carolina, subpoena me and let’s have a 3rd Cointelpro investigation and I’ll show the American people what a bunch of verminous traitors and facilitators of corporatist continuing criminal enterprise that their elected non-representatives truly are…I know who they are and when I soon publish my summary report our citizens will too.

    My first on camera news interview will be held near Washington Dulles International Airport [IAD] located in Chantilly, VA while I discuss a U.S. blacksite facility hidden beneath the boilerplate of a federal program sired as a legacy of CIA MK-ULTRA and KUBARK with the administrators of same and others remaining culpable for Congressional perjury, the theft of government funds, fraudulently soliciting a clandestine budget, conspiracy, torture, terrorism, kidnapping, rape, attempted murder, and the wrongful death if not assassinations of persons with clandestine security clearances ordered by various Attorney Generals. This only scratches the surface of what I know and will submit evidentiary proof giving me legal standing with grounds for a Bivens action and universal jurisdiction.

    On my oath to life and in the defense of the world of human beings and the American people, I pledge that should you foolishly move against WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, I will be standing with him to pullback the iron curtain of Beltway corruption and expose the culpable actors.


    The REAL legal charge against Assange is for having UNPROTECTED SEX, because he allegedly failed to properly wear a condom on two separate occasions in which he had admittingly CONSENSUAL sex with Swedish female citizens. I provide some links at the bottom for those very few out there who still bother to check FACTS nowadays.

    I’m extremely surprised -then again maybe I shouldn’t be- that the major U.S. media sources are NOT reporting clearly on what the TRUE underlying allegations against Assange are, prefering instead to throw-out the much more damaging “RAPE!” cries against him. What sleezebuckets these people.

    By engaging in obvious SMEAR TACTICS such as this against Assange, the American media showed its true colors and ultimately just dealt ITSELF the final death blow, given that it’s LOST whatever miserable shred of credibility, dignity & respect it possessed up to this moment.

    As to the question of whether Wikileaks is “good”or “bad”; consider this;

    Wikileaks exposes war crimes, murders, corruption, fraud, shady dealings, torture, kidnappings and other CRIMES. If you’re a good person, with good reasoning powers, then you’ll inevitably see Wikileaks as something GOOD.
    Now if on the other hand, you’re a murdering, low-down, miserable, war-criminal, torturing, slimeball POS scoundrel, then you’ll inevitably HATE IT.


    Ghost Boys:

    I think dat he is the one of the socialist of the IT era……

    he is the only one man who braked American govt. websites and give to review us……



    each ******* of america will be go to hell >>>>>>>

    i mean only the goverence team of the hell (america)


  • وکی لیکس: سوئس اثاثے منجمد

    خیال ہے کہ اسانش برطانیہ کے جنوب مشرقی علاقے میں روپوش ہیں

    سوئٹزر لینڈ کے پوسٹ آفس بینک ’پوسٹ فنانس‘ نے وکی لیکس کے بانی جولین اسانج کے کھاتے منجمد کر دیے ہیں۔

    وکی لیکس کا کہنا ہے کہ جو کھاتے منجمد کیے گئے ہیں ان میں ایک ڈیفینس فنڈ اور اکتیس ہزار یورو کے ذاتی اثاثے شامل ہیں۔

    پوسٹ فناننس نے اپنی ویب سائٹ پر لکھا ہے کہ اکاؤنٹ کھولتے وقت مسٹر اسانج نے غلط اطلاع فراہم کی تھی کہ ان کے پاس سوئٹزر لینڈ کی رہائش ہے۔ بینک کا کہنا تھا کہ اسانج سوئٹزر لینڈ میں اپنی رہائش کا ثبوت پیش نہیں کر پائے اس طرح وہ بینک کے کسٹمر رلیشن شپ کے معیار پر پورے نہیں اترتے اور بینک کو ان کے کھاتے بند کرنے کا اختیار حاصل ہے۔

    پوسٹ فننانس کی جانب سے وکی لیکس کے اکاؤنٹس بند کرنے کا یہ اقدام گزشتہ ہفتے خفیہ امریکی سفارتی دستاویز شائع کرنے کے بعد وکی لیکس کے لیے ایک تازہ جھٹکا ہے۔

    وکی لیکس نے سینکڑوں خفیہ سفارتی دستاویز جاری کر کے امریکہ کو ناراض کر دیا ہے۔ دریں اثناء مسٹر اسانج کی گرفتاری کے وارنٹ برطانوی حکام کو بھیج دیئے گئے ہیں۔

    ذرائع نے بی بی سی کو بتایا ہے کہ جولین اسانج کی گرفتاری کے یوروپی وارنٹ پیر کی دوپہر برطانیہ کو موصول ہو گئے۔

    سویڈن کی عدالت جنسی زیادتی کے معاملے میں جولین اسانج سے پوچھ گچھ کرنا چاہتی ہے ۔سویڈن میں انہیں دو خواتین کے ساتھ جنسی زیادتی کے الزام کا سامنا ہے۔اسانج اس الزام کی تردید کرتے ہیں۔ ان کا کہنا ہے کہ انہوں نے دونوں خواتین کی مرضی سے ہی ان کے ساتھ جنسی تعلق قائم کیا تھا۔

    خیال ہے کہ اسانج برطانیہ کے جنوب مشرقی علاقے میں روپوش ہیں۔ بی بی سی کے سکیورٹی امور کے نامہ نگار فرینک گارڈنر کا کہنا ہے کہ اگر پولیس انہیں گرفتار کر لیتی ہے تو انہیں گرفتاری کے چوبیس گھنٹوں کے اندر اندر مجسٹریٹ کی عدالت میں پیش کیا جائے گا اور اس کے بعد انہیں سویڈن کے حوالے کرنے کا عمل شروع ہوگا۔


  • Wiki leaks have affirmed many known truths as far as Pakistan is concerned. The civilian- military struggle for power in Pakistan is not a new thing. American mediation is not a novel phenomena among different pretenders of power in Pakistan. Every power seeker needs to seek the support of American support if he/she wants to govern Pakistan. That is reality of Pakistani politics whether you like it or not. Besides, Americans have to work with everybody out of their political necessities.

    What it really has exposed is Pakistani Strategic depth sovereignty blades of journalists. They are doing their best to please their pay-masters. They have said goodbye to journalistic ethics,common sense and truth in order win the competition of ”who pleases the establishment most?”. Their logical consistencies are full of paradoxes, getting personal and rhetoric. Let us examine these fallacies.

    1- if Zardari shares his secrets to Americans ,he has sold the nation to Americans whereas if Army chief, shares his plans to dismantle the elected government,He has saved the nation. What does it mean?A military bureaucrat is more patriotic than an elected president. Haroon Rashid uses the Communist Poet Faiz to justify the patriotism of Army chief. No surprise, Haroon Rashid uses Koran to justify his most cherished brand of fascism.

    2- There is wider conspiracy behind these leaks to make the Islamic countries to fight against each other conveniently ignoring this fact that Muslims are fighting against each other since the beginning of Islam.

    3- We should take wiki leaks on face value. This means Ambassadors of America do not err or lie. I do not understand why suddenly great Satan has stopped lying , deceiving and cons-pirating.

    The truthfulness of American diplomats is a welcoming factor because then eradicating terrorists would become a national priority. On that basis, we could shut all Jihadi Maddressa,imprison all financiers of terrorism and ban all terrorism loving Islamic parties like jamat e islami. I do not think our Islamic fascists would follow this line.

    4- Wiki leaks are an authentic document which show that Imran Khan is only patriot who is not under American influence. Theses anchors ignore this fact blatantly that American simply do not need talk to him because he does not have any political clout.

    After saying all that, I would like to say that Pakistani political discourse thrives on scandals,accusations, allegation and shallow chit-chat of a very incompetent political elite. It is never about political policies. What we see in Pakistan is just pornography of politics.

  • Assange to fight extradition: lawyer

    TONY EASTLEY: Lawyers for WikiLeak’s editor and founder, Julian Assange, say he could have a meeting with British authorities to discuss sexual assault charges laid against him by Swedish police, within 24 hours.

    Scotland Yard has received a European arrest warrant for Mr Assange. Sweden wants him extradited but that’s something he and his lawyers are fighting. They fear he will be handed over to US authorities.

    Since WikiLeaks published thousands of confidential American diplomatic cables, Mr Assange has become one of the world’s most publicised and wanted men. In the US his actions have been described as akin to terrorism.

    One of his lawyers, Jennifer Robinson, says her client’s ability to fight the charges have been hampered by the freezing of his bank account.

    She told AM that Mr Assange will approach Australia’s High Commission in London for consular assistance.

    I asked Jennifer Robinson whether the arrest warrant had been officially issued.

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: The arrest warrant has been communicated today and I can confirm that we were contacted by the police this afternoon and are in the process of arranging, negotiating for a meeting with Mr Assange to deal with this matter.

    They, Sweden is obviously seeking extradition but again we say it is completely disproportionate because we are offering testimony that they seek. The Swedish prosecutor was on national television just last night saying that all she wants to hear is his side of the story. We find that incredible considering we have offered his side of the story on numerous occasions and she has rejected those offers.

    TONY EASTLEY: Alright, well that meeting that you’re talking about is that a face-to-face meeting between Mr Assange and authorities?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: It will be but I’m unable to confirm any further details at this time.

    TONY EASTLEY: Why shouldn’t he got to Sweden to answer the charges?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: Well he’s offered on a number of occasions to offer her, the answers to her questions. She said publicly on television last night that all she wants is his side of the story. Now we’ve offered that on numerous occasions. There is no need for him to return to Sweden to do that.

    TONY EASTLEY: So he’ll answer the questions but he’d rather not got to Sweden to do it?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: Well first we need the evidence. I mean he needs to be told what the allegations are against him and the evidence against him.

    TONY EASTLEY: Is that not in the arrest warrant?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: We haven’t even seen a copy of the arrest warrant. What we know is that an arrest warrant was issued about two weeks ago, communicated to the UK authorities, and it was sent back on the grounds that there was an administrative error. I am still trying to seek confirmation of what that was.

    I have been writing to Europol, to Interpol, the British authorities seeking copies of these various arrest warrants that have been communicated and none have been provided. We have not the arrest warrant, we have not the evidence, we have not an allegation in English.

    TONY EASTLEY: Is that highly unusual?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: It is highly irregular. In fact it’s bizarre.

    TONY EASTLEY: Has Mr Assange’s accounts been frozen in the meantime?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: This is another one of our complaints. Just today his Swiss bank account, which was in fact the bank account to which we were fundraising for his legal defence fund, was frozen.

    So he’s in the incredibly undesirable position of being in a foreign country, without access to funds, looking to post bail and he’s just had his legal defence fund frozen on discriminatory grounds which places into question his ability to raise a defence against these charges here in the UK.

    So all stops are being pulled.

    TONY EASTLEY: Has he sought Australian consular assistance?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: He has sought Australian consular assistance in Sweden some time ago and nothing was forthcoming. So we are obviously very keen to be in touch with the Australian authorities and seek their assistance.

    TONY EASTLEY: So, will you try again?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: Absolutely, and I will be communicating that this evening.

    TONY EASTELY: Do you expect to get help from the Australian Government?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: I do. The Attorney-General has, in a fairly big turn-around, come out and said that consular assistance will be available and of course we will be availing ourselves of that assistance.

    TONY EASTLEY: A raft of high powered people in different countries are lining up to criticise and condemn Julian Assange, will he get a fair trial, a fair hearing?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: I think he will get a fair hearing here in Britain but I think our, his prospects if he were ever to be returned to the US, which is a real threat, of a fair trial is, in my view, nigh on impossible.

    TONY EASTELY: As his lawyer have you come under any pressure?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: We have. Just in the last week both myself and Mark Stephens, his two lawyers here in London, have been under surveillance and I have instructions from his Swedish counsel that he has suffered the same experience.

    TONY EASTLEY: What sort of surveillance?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: Being followed, having people sitting outside our homes, certain interferences with telephone calls. A number of issues.

    TONY EASTLEY: Do you have any idea who’s behind that?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: It would only be speculation.

    TONY EASTLEY: Where is Mr Assange now?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: I cannot confirm his whereabouts, though we are in contact with him and as I said earlier we are in the process of negotiating with police to arrange for a meeting.

    TONY EASTLEY: Is it right to assume that he’s somewhere in the UK?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: As I said I can’t confirm his whereabouts.

    TONY EASTLEY: If it wasn’t Mr Assange but a large newspaper organisation publishing the leaks do you think governments would be pursuing the case with such force?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: Well what we have to remember is that news organisations are publishing the leaks in the same way that WikiLeaks are. So there are real questions about the way in which he is being isolated and persecuted.

    TONY EASTLEY: A report in an Australian newspaper this-morning says Mr Assange’s family in Australia has received threats. Can you confirm that?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: I can confirm that there have been threats in the US on various blog sites calling on people to harm his son. This is obviously part of a broader risk of threat to Mr Assange himself.

    We take these threats of assassination incredibly seriously and they are obviously illegal and those individuals who are inciting violence ought to be considered for prosecution.

    As we’ve seen in Canada, the former advisor to the prime minister, a university professor, had very publicly called for his assassination. He’s now under police investigation and rightly so in my view.

    TONY EASTLEY: If Mr Assange was arrested and faced court would that stop WikiLeaks publishing more leaked documents?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: Absolutely not. I think we’re up to today cable 261 of 250,000. The media organisations that are working with WikiLeaks to publish this material have been working on this for some time and we suspect that the cables will continue to be published in an orderly fashion in accordance with the schedule agreed for the coming months and perhaps longer.

    So there is a wealth of material that’s out there and that will not stop with Mr Assange’s arrest.

    TONY EASTLEY: Just harking back to that meeting, Jennifer Robinson, the meeting that you’re hoping to set up between Mr Assange and authorities, just explain what you hope to, who will be the players in that meeting and what do you hope to get out of it?

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: I’m not in a position to confirm anything about that meeting just yet. But, suffice to say that we are negotiating with the police to arrange a meeting to deal with this arrest warrant and the allegations against him.

    TONY EASTLEY: Alright. Thank you very much for joining us this-morning on AM.

    JENNIFER ROBINSON: You’re welcome, my pleasure.

    TONY EASTLEY: Lawyer Jennifer Robinson who’s acting for Julian Assange, WikiLeaks founder, speaking there from our London studio this morning.

    The Attorney-General Robert McClelland says Mr Assange is entitled to the same rights as any other Australian citizen.

    This includes the right to return to Australia and also to receive consular assistance while he is overseas if that is requested.


  • ۔ اور آج یہ عالم ہے کہ جولین آسانج نامی آسٹریلیوی باشندے نے پوری دنیا کو امریکہ کے ڈھائی لاکھ سفارتی رازوں سے آگاہ کر دیا ہے۔ اس کے پاس امریکی ایٹمی راز بھی موجود ہے۔ عالمی سرمایہ داری نے سرد جنگ میں فتح کے بعد دنیا کے ہر گھر میں کمپیوٹر اور انٹرنیٹ پہنچا دیا ہے۔ اب اس کے راز فشا ہوتے ہیں تو اس میں کسی کا کیا قصور۔ اب وقت آ گیا ہے کہ امریکہ کرہ ارض پر انسانی مخلوق کو سرمایہ داری کی حاصلات میں شریک کر ے یا پھر وہ اینٹی میزائل شیلڈ کے حصار میں تحفظ حاصل کرنے کے علاوہ اپنے اور اپنے اتحادیوں کے دروازے تیسری دنیا کے بد حال لوگوں کے لئے بھی بند کر دے۔ لیکن ایسا کیونکر ہو سکتا ہے۔ جب ایک شخص تنہا راتوں رات یک ستونی سپر پاور کے سامنے ایک اور سپر پاور بن کر آ سکتا ہے، تو دنیا میں ایسی کتنی اور سپر پاورز کا ظہور ہو سکتا ہے۔ میں کسی خوش گمانی کا شکار نہیں۔ امریکہ اب بھی ایک بہت بڑی طاقت ہے۔ اس نے جنگوں کے ذریعے دنیا کو بد صورت بنانے کے علاوہ ان گنت اچھے کام بھی کئے ہیں۔ وہ بلاشبہ ایک حیرت زدہ کر دینے والی قوت ہے مگر اس زمین پرحقیقی سپر پاور، دنیا بھر میں آباد اربوں انسان ہیں۔ امریکہ اپنے نیو ورلڈ آرڈر کیلئے ایک عالمی رہبر کا کردار ادا کرے۔ اس کے پاس بہت سے ایس آر 71، یو ٹو، کورونا سٹیلائٹ اور دیگر جدید حساس آلات موجود ہیں۔ امریکہ، ہلمند، قندوز، قلعہ جنگی اور تورا بورا کی غاروں سے باہر نکلے اور ہمیں بھی باہر نکالے، ہم 30 سال پر پھیلے ہوئے اس گریٹ گیم سے اکتا چکے ہیں۔ کیا امریکہ اب تک نہیں اکتایا۔

    ہم گریٹ گیم سے اکتا چکے ہیں…عرض حال…نذیر لغاری


  • Open letter calls for Gillard to defend Assange

    A group of almost 200 prominent names have appealed to Prime Minister Julia Gillard to defend WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

    Many prominent US figures have called for Mr Assange’s death since his whistleblower organisation began releasing hundreds of US diplomatic cables last month.

    And Ms Gillard has been accused by Mr Assange’s lawyers of prejudicing any case against him by claiming he is “guilty of illegality” for leaking the documents.

    But in the open letter posted on the ABC’s Drum website, figures such as writer Noam Chomsky, former Family Court chief justice Alastair Nicholson, retired intelligence officer Lance Collins and actor Max Gillies call on Ms Gillard to ensure Mr Assange’s safety in light of the inflammatory rhetoric surrounding WikiLeaks.

    “We therefore call upon you to condemn, on behalf of the Australian Government, calls for physical harm to be inflicted upon Mr Assange and to state publicly that you will ensure Mr Assange receives the rights and protections to which he is entitled, irrespective of whether the unlawful threats against him come from individuals or states,” they write.

    In the letter, almost 200 signatories including Chaser star Julian Morrow, Greens MP Adam Bandt and author Helen Garner, say the Prime Minister needs to make a strong statement in support of freedom of information and resist calls to punish Mr Assange for the leaks.

    “We urge you to confirm publicly Australia’s commitment to freedom of political communication; to refrain from cancelling Mr Assange’s passport, in the absence of clear proof that such a step is warranted; to provide assistance and advocacy to Mr Assange; and do everything in your power to ensure that any legal proceedings taken against him comply fully with the principles of law and procedural fairness,” the letter states.

    “A statement by you to this effect should not be controversial – it is a simple commitment to democratic principles and the rule of law.”

    It says the leaks represent a “watershed” in the cause of freedom of speech, and the Government can make a difference by speaking out in defence of Mr Assange.

    “In many parts of the globe, death threats routinely silence those who would publish or disseminate controversial material,” it writes.

    “If these incitements to violence against Mr Assange, a recipient of Amnesty International’s Media Award, are allowed to stand, a disturbing new precedent will have been established in the English-speaking world.”

    Mr Assange has become the focal point for anger over the latest leaks, which detail private cables of US diplomats and have revealed damaging and embarrassing information about senior government figures around the world.

  • Julian Assange: The Latest Digital Refugee

    December 04, 2010

    With WikiLeaks under attack and with major corporations withdrawing their support, Julian Assange has become something of a digital refugee.

    Earlier this week WikiLeaks moved its site from its hosting platform in Sweden to Amazon in an attempt to deal with distributed denial of service (DDOS) attacks. Then on December 1 Amazon withdrew its support, saying it took down the site as it violated “terms of service” in that WikiLeaks was hosting content it didn’t own. (There were also disputed reports that Senator Joe Lieberman had been involved in getting Amazon to pull the plug.)

    Then on December 3, EveryDNS, a company that provided WikiLeaks with its Domain Name System (the URLs that correspond to IP addresses), withdrew its support — not they said because they disagreed with WikiLeaks’ content, but rather because providing their services to WikiLeaks threatened their operations and other customers.

    Of course, companies that provide hosting and web services are right to be worried. In 2009, DDOS attacks against a Georgian blogger, Cyxymu (who might have been the first popular digital refugee) meant Twitter going offline for a few hours and caused problems and speed issues for Facebook and LiveJournal. Cyxymu, a 34-year-old economics professor from Tbilisi, had most probably incurred the wrath of Russian hackers who were upset by his stance on the 2008 Russian-Georgian war. Hopping from platform to platform, the attackers found him and took him down.

    DDOS attacks are relatively cheap, usually effective, and don’t need an incredibly high level of technical knowhow. They can also be pretty hard to defend against. As Hal Roberts from Harvard University’s Berkman Center points out in a blog post, “there are very few infrastructures that can deal with them”:

    Defending against these large network attacks requires massive amounts of bandwidth, specific and deep technical experience, and often connections to the folks running the networks where the attacks are originating from. There are only a couple dozen organizations (ISPs, hypergiant websites, and content distribution networks) at the core of the Internet who have sufficient amounts of bandwidth, technical ability, and community connections to fight off the biggest of these attacks. Paying for services from those organizations is very expensive, though, starting at thousands of dollars per month without bandwidth costs and often going much, much higher.

    Whatever you may think of Assange (I think his attempts at radical transparency are misguided and will eventually backfire), the WikiLeaks case does raise many interesting questions about “intermediary censorship,” where private companies, for instance Internet service providers or social networks, remove offending material. (A good example from this year was Facebook removing content related to the Everybody Draw Mohammed Day after complaints from the Pakistani government.)

    Human rights groups often go with companies like Amazon for their hosting, or use Google’s Blogger platform, as those organizations have the capacity to deal with huge DDOS attacks. They see them as safe havens. The problem, of course, is that big conglomerates (especially in authoritarian countries) aren’t always safe havens and as Ethan Zuckerman points out in a blog post, “you’re relying on that company’s continued willingness to host your site.”

    Intermediaries can censor/pull the plug for many reasons: direct pressure from officials; because they want to continue receiving preferential treatment from a government; or because they don’t want to damage their business. Those intermediaries can justify removing content by saying it violates the site’s terms of service: i.e. attracting cyber-attacks and thus slowing down the site for everyone else. It’s what Evgeny Morozov has called “Terms of Service Censorship.”

    Of course, for those organizations intent on getting their message out, there are always other distribution channels. There is currently an initiative to set up mirror sites for WikiLeaks. Another option is BitTorrent, a peer-to-peer file sharing service. (For a while, there has been a mysterious “insurance file” which WikiLeaks has asked people to download and share.)

    Bar shutting down the Internet, there’s very little that can be done to stop those files from being distributed.


  • A funny comment via twitter:

    alqaeda Al-Qaeda
    I’m just glad I never had sex with anyone in Sweden. If I had, I’d probably be in custody by now. http://bit.ly/grMaHZ

    and also this one:

    TodaysBullshit Today’s Bullshit
    Julian Assange arrested in London. He not only screwed the U.S. without their permission, but apparently two women too.

  • The Wikileaks sex files: How two one-night stands sparked a worldwide hunt for Julian Assange

    A winter morning in backwoods Scandinavia and the chime of a church bell drifts across the snowbound town of Enkoping. Does it also toll for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange?

    Today, this small industrial centre, 40 miles west of Stockholm, remains best-known — if known at all — as the birthplace of the ­adjustable spanner.

    But if extradition proceedings involving ­Britain are successful, it could soon be rather more celebrated — by the U.S. government at least — as the place where Mr Assange made a ­catastrophic error.

    Here, in a first-floor flat in a dreary apartment block, the mastermind behind the leak of more than 250,000 classified U.S. diplomatic cables this month slept with a female admirer whom he had just met at a seminar. She subsequently made a complaint to police.

    As a result, Assange, believed to be in hiding in England, faces a criminal prosecution and ­possibly jail. Last night, a European Arrest ­Warrant was given by Interpol to Scotland Yard.

    The Stockholm police want to question him regarding the possible rape of a woman and separate allegations from another Swedish admirer, with whom he was having a concurrent fling. But there remains a huge question mark over the evidence. Many people believe that the 39-year-old ­Australian-born whistleblower is the victim of a U.S. government dirty tricks campaign.

    They argue that the whole squalid affair is a sexfalla, which translates loosely from the Swedish as a ‘honeytrap’.

    One thing is clear, though: Sweden’s complex rape laws are central to the story.

    Using a number of sources including leaked police interviews, we can begin to piece together the sequence of events which led to Assange’s liberty being threatened by Stockholm police rather than Washington, where already one U.S. politician has called on him to executed for ‘spying’.

    The story began on August 11 this year, when Assange arrived in Stockholm.

    He had been invited to be the key speaker at a seminar on ‘war and the role of the media’, ­organised by the centre-Left Brotherhood Movement.

    His point of contact was a female party official, whom we shall refer to as Sarah (her identity must be ­protected because of the ongoing legal proceedings).

    An attractive blonde, Sarah was already a well-known ‘radical feminist’. In her 30s, she had travelled the world following various fashionable causes.

    While a research assistant at a local university she had not only been the protegee of a militant feminist ­academic, but held the post of ‘campus sexual equity officer’. Fighting male discrimination in all forms, including sexual harassment, was her forte.

    Sarah and Assange had never met. But in a series of internet and telephone conversations, they agreed that during his visit he could stay at her small apartment in central Stockholm. She said she would be away from the city until the day of the seminar itself.

    What happened over the next few days — while casting an extraordinary light on the values of the two women involved — suggests that even if the WikiLeaks founder is innocent of any charges, he is certainly a man of strong sexual appetites who is not averse to exploiting his fame.

    Certainly his stay was always going to be a very social affair, mingling with like-minded and undoubtedly admiring people.

    That Thursday, he held court at the Beirut Cafe in Stockholm, dining with fellow ‘open government’ campaigners and an American journalist.

    The following afternoon, Sarah returned to Stockholm, 24 hours earlier than planned.

    In an interview she later gave to police, she is reported to have said: ‘He (Assange) was there when I came home. We talked a little and decided that he could stay.’

    The pair went out for dinner together at a nearby restaurant. Afterwards they returned to her flat and had sex. What is not disputed by either of them is

    that a condom broke — an event which, as we shall see, would later take on great significance.

    At the time, however, the pair ­continued to be friendly enough the next day, a Saturday, with Sarah even throwing a party for him at her home in the evening.

    That same day, Assange attended his seminar at the Swedish trade union HQ. In the front row of the audience, dressed in an eye-catching pink jumper — you can see her on a YouTube ­internet clip recorded at the time — was a pretty twentysomething whom we shall call Jessica. She was the woman — who two sources this week told me is a council employee — from Enkoping.

    Jessica would later tell police that she had first seen Assange on television a few weeks before. She had found him ‘interesting, brave and admirable’. As a result, she began to follow the ­WikiLeaks saga, and when she discovered that he was due to visit Stockholm she ­contacted the Brotherhood Movement to volunteer to help out at the seminar. Although her offer was not taken up, she decided to attend the seminar anyway and took a large number of photos of Assange during his 90-minute talk.

    It is believed that by happenstance Jessica also met Sarah — the woman with whom Assange had spent the night — during the meeting.

    Afterwards, she hung around and was still there when Assange — who has a child from a failed relationship around 20 years ago — left with a group of male friends for lunch.

    Sources conflict here. One says that she asked to tag along; another that Assange invited her to join them.

    Subsequently, one of Assange’s friends recalled that Jessica had been ‘very keen’ to get Assange’s attention.

    She was later to tell police that, at the restaurant, Assange put his arm around her shoulder. ‘I was flattered. It was obvious that he was flirting,’ she reportedly said.

    The attraction was mutual. After lunch, the pair went to the cinema to see a film called Deep Sea. Jessica’s account suggests that were ‘intimate’ and then went to a park where Assange told her she was ‘attractive’.

    But he had to leave to go to a ‘crayfish party’, a traditional, and usually boozy, Swedish summer event.

    Jessica asked if they would meet again. ‘Of course,’ said the WikiLeaks supremo. They parted and she took a train back to Enkoping while he took a cab back to his temporary base at Sarah’s flat, where the crayfish party was to be held. You might think it strange that Sarah would want to throw a party in honour of the man about whom she would later make a complaint to police concerning their liaison the night before.

    This is only one of several puzzling flaws in the prosecution case.

    A few hours after that party, Sarah apparently Tweeted: ‘Sitting outside … nearly freezing, with the world’s coolest people. It’s pretty amazing!’ She was later to try to erase this message.

    During the party, Assange apparently phoned Jessica and a few hours later she was boasting to friends about her flirtation with him. At that point, according to police reports, her friends advised her ‘the ball is in your court’.

    So it was that on the Monday, Jessica called Assange and they arranged to get together in Stockholm. When they did meet they agreed to go to her home in Enkoping, but he had no money for a train ticket and said he didn’t want to use a credit card because he would be ‘tracked’ (presumably, as he saw it, by the CIA or other agencies).

    So Jessica bought both their tickets.

    She had snagged perhaps the world’s most famous activist, and after they arrived at her apartment they had sex. According to her testimony to police, Assange wore a condom. The following morning they made love again. This time he used no protection.

    Jessica reportedly said later that she was upset that he had refused when she asked him to wear a condom.

    Again there is scant evidence — in the public domain at least — of rape, sexual molestation or unlawful coercion.

    What’s more, the following morning, on the Tuesday, the pair amicably went out to have breakfast together and, at her prompting, Assange promised to stay in touch. He then returned to Stockholm, with Jessica again paying for his ticket.

    What happened next is difficult to explain. The most likely interpretation of events is that as a result of a one-night stand, one participant came to regret what had happened.

    Jessica was worried she could have caught a sexual disease, or even be pregnant: and this is where the story takes an intriguing turn. She then decided to phone Sarah — whom she had met at the ­seminar, and with whom Assange had been staying — and apparently confided to her that she’d had unprotected sex with him.

    At that point, Sarah said that she, too, had slept with him.

    As a result of this conversation, Sarah reportedly phoned an acquaintance of Assange and said that she wanted him to leave her apartment. (He refused to do so, and maintains that she only asked him to leave three days later, on the Friday of that week.)

    How must Sarah have felt to ­discover that the man she’d taken to her bed three days before had already taken up with another woman? ­Furious? Jealous? Out for revenge? Perhaps she merely felt aggrieved for a fellow woman in distress.

    Having taken stock of their options for a day or so, on Friday, August 20, Sarah and Jessica took drastic action.

    They went together to a Stockholm police station where they said they were seeking advice on how to proceed with a complaint by Jessica against Assange.

    According to one source, Jessica wanted to know if it was possible to force Assange to undergo an HIV test. Sarah, the seasoned feminist warrior, said she was there merely to support Jessica. But she also gave police an account of what had happened between herself and Assange a week before.

    The female interviewing officer, presumably because of allegations of a sabotaged condom in one case and a refusal to wear one in the ­second, concluded that both women were victims: that ­Jessica had been raped, and Sarah subject to sexual molestation.

    It was Friday evening. A duty prosecuting attorney, Maria ­Kjellstrand, was called.

    She agreed that Assange should be sought on suspicion of rape.

    The following day, Sarah was questioned again, cementing the allegation of sexual misconduct against Assange. That evening, detectives tried to find him and searched Stockholm’s entertainment district — but to no avail.

    By Sunday morning, the news had leaked to the Press.

    Indeed, it has been suggested that the two women had discussed approaching a tabloid newspaper to maximise Assange’s discomfort. By now, the authorities realised they had a high-profile case on their hands and legal papers were rushed to the weekend home of the chief ­prosecutor, who dismissed the rape charge.

    She felt that what had occurred were no more than minor offences.

    But the case was now starting to spin out of control.

    Sarah next spoke to a newspaper, saying: ‘In both cases, the sex had been consensual from the start but had eventually turned into abuse.’

    Rejecting accusations of an international plot to trap Assange, she added: ‘The accusations were not set up by the Pentagon or anybody else. The responsibility for what happened to me and the other girl lies with a man with a twisted view of women, who has a problem accepting the word “no”.’

    The two women then instructed Claes Borgstrom, a so-called ‘gender lawyer’ who is a leading supporter of a campaign to extend the legal ­definition of rape to help bring more rapists to justice.

    As a result, in September the case was reopened by the authorities, and last month Interpol said Assange was wanted for ‘sex crimes’.

    Yesterday, his lawyer Mark Stephens said the Swedish warrant was a ‘political stunt’ and that he would fight it on the grounds that it could lead to the WikiLeaks founder being handed over to the American authorities (Sweden has an ­extradition treaty with the U.S.).

    Assange continues to insist that he has done nothing wrong, and that his sexual encounters with both women were consensual.

    But last week, the Swedish High Court refused to hear his final appeal against arrest, and extra­dition papers were presented to police in England, where Assange is currently in hiding. He is able to stay in this country thanks to a six-month visa which expires in the spring.

    So what to make of a story in which it’s hard to argue that any of the ­parties emerges with much credit? How reliable are the two female witnesses?

    Earlier this year, Sarah is reported to have posted a telling entry on her website, which she has since removed. But a copy has been retrieved and widely circulated on the internet.

    Entitled ‘7 Steps to Legal Revenge’, it explains how women can use courts to get their own back on unfaithful lovers.

    Step 7 says: ‘Go to it and keep your goal in sight. Make sure your victim suffers just as you did.’ (The highlighting of text is Sarah’s own.)

    As for Assange, he remains in ­hiding in Britain, and his website continues to release classified American documents that are ­daily embarrassing the U.S. government.

    Clearly, he is responsible for an avalanche of political leaks. Whether he is also guilty of sexual offences remains to be seen.

    But the more one learns about the case, the more one feels that, unlike the bell in Enkoping, the allegations simply don’t ring true


  • Share
    وہ اسامہ بن لادن سے زیادہ خطرناک کیوں؟….قلم کمان …حامد میر

    اس نے کوئی جرم نہیں کیا لیکن پھر بھی اسے گرفتار کرلیا گیا۔ اس کی گرفتاری نے جمہوریت، انسانی حقوق اور آزادی اظہار کے علمبرداروں کے اصلی چہرے کو بے نقاب کردیا ہے۔ سویڈن کی حکومت کہتی ہے کہ وکی لیکس کا ایڈیٹر انچیف جولین اسانج ایک عورت کے ساتھ زیادتی کے الزام میں مطلوب ہے اس لئے انٹرپول کی درخواست پر برطانوی پولیس نے جولین اسانج کو گرفتار کرلیا ہے۔ ساری دنیا جانتی ہے کہ جولین اسانج نے کسی عورت کے ساتھ نہیں بلکہ امریکا کے ساتھ چھیڑ خانی کی ہے۔ اس نے سپرپاور امریکا کے سفارت کاروں کی جاسوسیاں بے نقاب کردیں۔ ری پبلکن پارٹی کی رہنما سارہ پالن نے مطالبہ کیا ہے کہ جولین اسانج کو اسامہ بن لادن کی طرح شکار کرکے امریکا لایا جائے۔ سوال یہ ہے کہ اگر واقعی اس صحافی نے سویڈن میں کوئی جرم کیا ہے تو اسے گرفتار کرکے امریکا لانے کا مطالبہ کیوں؟ ہم تو سمجھتے تھے کہ صحافیوں کے خلاف جھوٹے مقدمات صرف پاکستان میں بنتے ہیں لیکن اب پتہ چلا کہ اس معاملے میں سویڈن بھی کسی سے کم نہیں جسے ٹرانسپرینسی انٹرنیشنل دنیا کے سب سے دیانت دار ممالک کی فہرست میں شامل کرتی ہے۔ سویڈن ان ممالک میں شامل ہے جہاں کی حکومتیں آزادی اظہار کو بہت زیادہ اہمیت دینے کا دعویٰ کرتی ہیں یہاں تک کہ چند سال قبل جب کچھ مغربی اخبارات نے نبی کریم حضرت محمد صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم کے توہین آمیز خاکے شائع کئے تو سویڈن، ڈنمارک اور ہالینڈ سمیت متعدد مغربی ممالک کی حکومتوں کا موقف تھا کہ میڈیا کی آزادی پر کوئی پابندی نہیں لگائی جاسکتی لیکن جب جولین اسانج نے وکی لیکس کے ذریعہ امریکا کی توہین کر ڈالی تو ایک جھوٹے مقدمے میں جولین اسانج کو گرفتار کرلیا گیا۔ امریکا، برطانیہ اور دیگر مغربی ممالک کو شاید احساس نہیں کہ انہوں نے جولین اسانج کو گرفتار کرکے اپنی ساکھ کو ناقابل تلافی نقصان پہنچایا ہے۔ ایشیا اور افریقہ کے وہ لوگ جو برطانوی جمہوریت کو اپنے لئے رول ماڈل سمجھتے ہیں انہیں سخت مایوسی ہوئی ہے کیونکہ برطانیہ اور سویڈن دراصل امریکا کے خوشامدی بن کر سامنے آئے ہیں۔ جولین اسانج ان تمام ممالک کے عوام کا ہیرو بن گیا ہے جہاں امریکا نے دہشت گردی کے خلاف جنگ کے نام پر ہزاروں بے گناہ افراد کو قتل کیا۔
    جولین اسانج کا سب سے پہلا جرم یہی تھا کہ اس نے عراق میں امریکی فوج کی طرف سے نہتے اور بے گناہ شہریوں کے قتل عام کی ویڈیو ریلیز کی۔ پھر اس نے افغانستان میں امریکی فوج کی طرف سے بے گناہ شہریوں کے قتل کے بارے میں دستاویزات جاری کیں تو اسے امریکا کا دشمن قرار دیا گیا۔ جولین اسانج کا کہنا تھا کہ وہ جنگ کے خلاف نہیں کیونکہ بعض اوقات جنگ ناگزیر ہوتی ہے لیکن اگر آپ اپنی جنگ کو درست اور اپنی بقاء کے لئے ناگزیر سمجھتے ہیں تو پھر آپ اس جنگ میں جھوٹ کیوں بولتے ہیں؟ اس نے سوال اٹھایاکہ اگر امریکا کی جنگ سچی ہے تو پھر امریکا اس جنگ میں جھوٹ کیوں بولتا ہے؟ جولین اسانج کا تعلق آسٹریلیا سے ہے اور آسٹریلیا دہشت گردی کے خلاف جنگ میں اسی طرح امریکا کا اتحادی ہے جیسے پاکستان بھی امریکا کا اتحادی ہے۔ جب جولین اسانج نے دہشت گردی کے خلاف جنگ کے نام پر امریکا کی دہشت گردی کو بے نقاب کیا تو آسٹریلیا میں کہا گیا کہ وہ قومی سلامتی کے لئے خطرہ ہے۔ سوال یہ ہے کہ اگر وہ آسٹریلیا کی قومی سلامتی کے لئے خطرہ ہے تو اسے سویڈن میں قائم ایک مقدمے میں برطانیہ سے کیوں گرفتار کیا گیا؟ کیسی ستم ظریفی ہے کہ وکی لیکس کی جاری کردہ دستاویزات کو برطانیہ کے اخبار دی گارڈین، امریکی اخبار نیویارک ٹائمز، اسپین کے اخبار ایل پیس اور جرمن جریدے دیر سپیگل نے بھی شائع کیا لیکن امریکی حکام کا غصہ صرف جولین اسانج پر ہے۔ شاید اس لئے کہ جولین اسانج کا تعلق آسٹریلیا سے ہے اور وہ ایک ایسی ویب سائٹ کا خالق ہے جو صرف چار سال پرانی ہے۔ گرفتاری سے ایک دن قبل جولین اسانج نے اپنے ملک کے ایک اخبار ”دی آسٹریلین“ میں ایک مضمون لکھا جس کا عنوان تھا۔ ”فتح ہمیشہ سچ کی ہوتی ہے“۔ اس نے لکھا کہ امریکا اور برطانیہ اپنے بڑے بڑے اخبارات کے خلاف کارروائی نہیں کررہے لیکن میرے پیچھے پڑے ہیں شاید اس لئے کہ میں کمزور ہوں لیکن مجھے یقین ہے کہ فتح آخر کارسچ کی ہوگی، میں نے کوئی جھوٹ نہیں بولا بلکہ میں نے حکومتوں کاجھوٹ بے نقاب کیا ہے۔
    جولین اسانج کے اس ایک مضمون نے آسٹریلیا میں تہلکہ مچا دیا اور اب آسٹریلوی حکومت اپنے باشندے کی رہائی کے لئے متحرک ہوچکی ہے۔ جولین اسانج نے اپنی گرفتاری سے قبل دنیا کے مختلف ممالک میں بہت سے صحافیوں کے ساتھ رابطہ قائم کیا اور انہیں ان ممالک کی حکومتوں کے متعلق کچھ اہم حقائق سے آگاہ کرنے کے بعد بتایا کہ اسے بہت جلد گرفتار کرلیا جائے گا لیکن وکی لیکس کے انکشافات کا سلسلہ جاری رہے گا لہٰذا انکشافات کی اشاعت کے ساتھ ساتھ جولین اسانج کو بھی یاد رکھا جائے۔ مجھے یقین ہے کہ جولین اسانج کو ایک جھوٹے مقدمے میں سزا دینا بہت مشکل ہوگا۔ اگرکسی جج نے اسے سزا سنائی تو وہ اس صدی کا بدنام ترین جج بن جائے گا۔ پاکستان میں کچھ لوگ جولین اسانج کو ابھی تک امریکی ایجنٹ قراردے رہے ہیں حالانکہ جولین اسانج دنیا بھر میں امریکی مفادات کے لئے اسامہ بن لادن سے بھی بڑا خطرہ بن چکا ہے۔ یہ درست ہے کہ جولین اسانج کی ویب سائٹ نے ساڑھے پانچ لاکھ دستاویزات میں سے ابھی تک صرف ساڑھے نو سو دستاویزات جاری کی ہیں اور ہم ان دستاویزات میں سے نئی نئی سازشوں کے پہلو تلاش کررہے ہیں۔ حقیقت یہ ہے کہ جولین اسانج نے کوئی سازش نہیں کی، اس نے ان دستاویزات کے ذریعہ امریکی اشاروں پر سازشیں کرنے والوں کے چہرے بے نقاب کئے ہیں۔ ان دستاویزات کسی کو بدنامی ملی ہے تو بہت سوں کو نیک نامی بھی ملی ہے۔ جولین اسانج نے امریکا کے اصل چہرے کو بے نقاب کیا ہے لہٰذا وہ ان سب کا دوست اور محسن ہے جو امریکی پالیسیوں کی کوکھ سے جنم لینے والے مسائل کا شکار ہیں۔ اگر آپ بھی جولین اسانج کو اپنا محسن اور دوست سمجھتے ہیں تو اس کی گرفتاری کے خلاف احتجاج میں اپنی آواز کو شامل کیجئے۔ آج نہیں تو کل وہ ضرور رہا ہوگا اور اس کی رہائی یہ ثابت کرے گی کہ اسے اسامہ بن لادن سے زیادہ خطرناک سمجھنے والی سپرپاور کے زوال کا وقت اب شروع ہوچکا ہے۔


  • Julian Assange urges supporters to protect WikiLeaks
    WikiLeaks editor-in-chief asks the world to defend his site from attacks by ‘instruments of US foreign policy’

    The crippling web attacks on multinational companies threaten to escalate after WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange urged supporters to protect the whisteblowers’ site from “instruments of US foreign policy”.

    Whitehall is preparing for an online backlash from the Anonymous cyber activists that brought down sites belonging to Visa, Mastercard and Paypal last week in response to the companies cutting ties with WikiLeaks. Downing Street said sites that deal with tax returns or benefits for millions of Britons are on red alert for a possible cyber attack.

    Speaking though a written statement from his Wandsworth prison cell, Assange last night said he was “calling for the world to protect my work and my people” from renewed pressure to restrict the site from publishing more leaked documents.

    A number of companies hosting WikiLeaks’ online operations, including Amazon and Paypal, have terminated their relationship with the whistleblowers’ site after pressure from Joe Lieberman, chair of the US homeland security committee.

    Assange is today appearing at Westminster magistrates court to appeal against the decision to refuse him bail, pending extradition to Sweden over allegations of sexual assault. He said last night that his convictions were “unfaltering” despite the extradition attempt, according to a written statement sent to Australian broadcaster the Seven Network by his mother, Christine Assange.

    “We now know that Visa, Mastercard, Paypal and others are instruments of US foreign policy. It’s not something we knew before,” Assange said in a statement likely to add new impetus to the spate of cyber attacks being perpetrated by Anonymous in support of WikiLeaks.

    In a separate development, an attack which exposed the email addresses and passwords of 1.3 million Gawker users was also today linked with the thousand-strong Anonymous group.

    A subgroup of the amorphous “hacktivists” is preparing to hack and deface US government websites with pro-WikiLeaks propaganda, according to a Sky News journalist. Anonymous has previously made explicit its ambition to bring down the websites belonging to the US Senate and Swedish government.

    The website of the Royal Bank of Scotland was today experiencing problems loading after leaked US diplomatic documents showed that the bank’s new chairman, Sir Philip Hampton, had said its former directors had failed to live up to their duties. However, RBS said it was not coming under the attacks that have brought down other financial institutions’ websites in recent days.

    “We are aware of an issue affecting some online banking customers and we are working to resolve this as soon as possible,” RBS said in a statement. “We apologise to affected customers for any inconvenience this has caused.”