The jailing of three U.K. climate activists should provide another warning to anyone expecting judges to defend liberties. The current legal establishment will adapt itself to whatever legal framework is ordained by the rulers.
Assange lawyer Jennifer Robinson told the Belmarsh Tribunal in Sydney the very C.I.A. that plotted to kill the WikiLeaks publisher also would have a major say in the conditions of his imprisonment if he is convicted in the U.S.
On International Women’s Day the authors say that if feminists remain silent or support Biden’s under secretary of state simply because she is a woman, this Bush-era neocon might just burn down the world in a nuclear fire.
The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age just produced an immense example of conflict-of-interest journalism. A former prime minister called it “the most egregious and provocative news presentation” he had ever witnessed in over 50 years of public life.
Despite private and public requests for diplomatic assistance for the WikiLeaks publisher, Canberra’s policy — shown by FOI documents — has been one of complicit inactivity in the face of his persecution, reports Kellie Tranter.
The newspaper quoted unnamed “U.S. officials” who refused to talk about the “intelligence” that blames a pro-Ukraine group not linked to Kiev and that conveniently points the story away from possible U.S. involvement, reports Joe Lauria.
The term “Fourth Estate” had taken on the dust of a neglected antique before the release of the Pentagon Papers. Afterwards it seemed possible to think again of the press as the independent pole of power required by a working democracy.
The Belmarsh Tribunal is all about trying those who are guilty of crimes against humanity and those who are trying to cover them up by persecuting Julian Assange. (With transcript).
The criminal investigation undertaken by the federal government against hundreds of participants in the Jan. 6 storming of the U.S. Capitol is polarizing the country and shredding civil liberties.