The call for Julian Assange || The WikiLeaks Manifesto - We all should read it

[GazetaBitcoin]

Maybe many heard about the name of Julian Assange, but only few really know who he is, what he did or what he does now. From these, even less know why he is an emblematic figure in the crypto space.

This topic is a call for help, that's why I posted it in the Beginners & Help board. It's a call for helping Julian!

I planned writing this topic for a while, but from various reasons (the most important being the lack of time) I delayed it. However, a another recent discrediting of the press (in a way or another) determined me to write this thread. The reason behind is less important though. What's important is Julian needs help.


The last sentence of this topic is a cautionary tale: "All of us should continue Cypherpunks' work and to fight for freedom!".

The Cypherpunks group emerged initially in 1992 from Eric Hughes, the author of "The Cypherpunk Manifesto", John Gilmore and Timothy May, the author of "The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto". From a former meeting in Gilmore's office, a mailing list was born, under the name of Cypherpunks mailing list.

During time, others joined Cypherpunks' fight against the State surveilling the citizens. They eventually reached a number of over 1000 contributors.

Julian Assange was part of the group between 1995 and 2002. His brilliant mind was easily observed by the others. If May, Hughes or Gilmore were focused more on "algorithms for people", on digital cash and on public's access to cryptography (in an era when NSA was fighting with all its powers against that), Assange had a different principle: “Freedom of information is a respected liberal value”.

The WikiLeaks Manifesto, a document less known, unfortunately, contains other words of wisdom from Julian: "Only revealed injustice can be answered; for man to do anything intelligent he has to know what's actually going on".

Since the apparition of Gutenberg's printing press in 1448, which led to the Printing Revolution, elites' power over classified documents decayed constantly. This was one of the first forms of the information decentralization. Julian Assange took it to a whole new level.

And this happened after the launch of WikiLeaks, in 2006.

"I grew up with the understanding that the world I lived in was one where people enjoyed a sort of freedom to communicate with each other in privacy, without it being monitored, without it being measured or analyzed or sort of judged by these shadowy figures or systems, any time they mention anything that travels across public lines." - Edward Snowden

Sharing a similar thought with Snowden; and even more: trying to help him by recommending him where to settle and where not to settle his new life after betraying the govern; Assange published thousands of classified information from all parts of the world.

His connection to Bitcoin?, some may ask.

After US govern initiated a financial blockade over WikiLeaks' accounts, Julian realized the potential of Bitcoin and intended to accept the new cryptocurrency as a form for donations. The idea put BitcoinTalk on flame at that time:

"Bring it on”, emphasized RHorning.

However, continues Assange, ""Satoshi Nakamoto,” the pseudonymous inventor of Bitcoin, responded: “No, don’t "bring it on". The project needs to grow gradually so the software can be strengthened along the way. I make this appeal to WikiLeaks not to try to use Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a small beta community in its infancy. You would not stand to get more than pocket change, and the heat you would bring would likely destroy us at this stage.” [...] Six days later, on 12 December 2010, Satoshi famously vanished from the Bitcoin community, but not before posting this message: “It would have been nice to get this attention in any other context. WikiLeaks has kicked the hornet’s nest, and the swarm is headed towards us.”".

As a deep sign of respect for Satoshi and for his work, as Assange stated also (in the previous mentioned link), "WikiLeaks read and agreed with Satoshi’s analysis, and decided to put off the launch of a bitcoin donation channel until the currency had become more established. WikiLeaks’ bitcoin donation address was launched after the currency’s first major boom, on 14 June 2011.".

A sign of respect which is a rara avis nowadays.

But Julian's rely on Bitcoin certainly didn't help just WikiLeaks: it also helped Bitcoin to become more popular; it raised awareness about Satoshi's creation; it brought more and more people on the path opened by Satoshi.

What happened next is known better than the above mentioned history. US govern started to hunt Assange in 2011, and as a response, Julian managed to help himself by asking asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy from London. His request was granted in 2012. However, his staying in the embassy was not easy - among others, he never put his step outside the embassy until 2019(!), living almost as an inmate. Between a fabricated accusation of sexual harassment, which was dropped after years by the Swedish govern, and his continuous work for WikiLeaks, Assange also tried to keep his moral and to do his best to avoid the extradition to US, being well aware this would mean if not a death penalty, then at least 175 years behind the bars.

Unfortunately, in 2019 Ecuador ended his asylum, for reasons more or less ridiculous, but it's almost clear that the decision was forced somehow by other secret agencies or by other governs.

At the moment of writing this thread, Julian's trial for extradition has started. During the trial, he is staying in prison.

As I was saying recently, in a previous topic,

The fight for freedom of speech, for privacy and for rendering governs as irrelevant started a long time ago. Now it is in our hands.

It is in our hands also to help Julian. And helping him means to help freedom of information!

I'm not going to say how to offer this help. I'm sure everybody knows, or, at least, has an intuition about that.

There is time for debates and time for action. Debating is dead now.


Issues of note:

I also recommend reading the following:
- Nils Melzer's The Trial of Julian Assange: A Story of Persecution - The shocking story of the legal persecution of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and the dangerous implications for the whistleblowers of the future
- Robert Manne's piece of art The Cypherpunk Revolutionary Julian Assange
- The Most Dangerous Man In The World: The Inside Story On Julian Assange And WikiLeaks, written by Andrew Fowler
- Cypherpunks: Freedom and the Future of the Internet, by Julian Assange. The book is a discussion between Julian, Jacob Appelbaum (Tor developer) and Jérémie Zimmermann (co-founder of La Quadrature du Net)
- Underground, by Suelette Dreyfus & Julian Assange. It is a fascinating book about the rise of Australian hackers and phreakers from 1980s, including the early activity of Julian Assange which, by that time, was known under the nym Mendax
- When Google Met WikiLeaks, by Julian Assange
- The Unauthorised Autobiography, by Julian Assange.

Besides, the following movies are parts of the must watch category:

Ithaka - a documentary showing Julian's struggle to avoid extradition to US
Mediastan: A Wikileaks Road Movie - a WikiLeaks very own documentary - full movie
Risk - a WikiLeaks documentary, directed by Laura Poitras (a friend of Julian Assange) - full movie
The Fifth Estate - a great movie about WikiLeaks
We Steal Secrets: The Story of WikiLeaks - yet another documentary about WikiLeaks
Underground: The Julian Assange Story - another movie about Julian, depicting his early career.


Translations (in chronological order):

• Română: Apelul pentru Assange || Manifestul WikiLeaks – Cu toții ar trebui să-l citim, translation by GazetaBitcoin
• Filipino: Ang tawag para kay Julian Assange || Ang Pagmanipesto ng WikiLeaks - Basahin, translation by jeraldskie11
• Polish: Wezwanie do Juliana Assange || Manifest WikiLeaks - Wszyscy powinniśmy go przeczytać, translation by cygan
• Pidgin: De call for Julian Assange || De WikiLeaks Manifesto - Make all of us read, translation by sokani
• Bengali: জুলিয়ানের জন্য ডাক - সবার পড়া উচিৎ, translation by Learn Bitcoin
• French: L'appel pour Julian Assange || Le Manifeste de WikiLeaks - Nous devrions le lire, translation by iwantmyhomepaidwithbtc2
• Urdu: جولین اسانج کی کال || وکی لیکس کا منشور - ہم ک, translation by JunaidAzizi
• Indonesian: Panggilan untuk Julian Assange||Manifesto WikiLeaks-Kita semua harus membacanya, translation by dansus021

[1713527219]

1713527219

[GazetaBitcoin]

Reserved

[nullius]

Thank you, GazetaBitcoin.  This is a classic Gazeta post:  I will need some hours to peruse all your links!

Meanwhile, I will remark on the first thing I noticed:  As usual, the mainstream media is up to the dirty tricks of smear accusations, and cherry-picking the worst images they can find as of some they dislike.

Excepting that in an old self-quote, all images in this post are from Wikimedia Commons.  Although I am not always a fan of Wikimedia, they are a stable source—and they will not be cherry-picking bad-looking images of Assange.  I have linked each image to its page on Wikimedia Commons.  I encourage others to use presentable images of Assange when discussing him:  The Assange who built a powerful fight for freedom, not snapshots grabbed in bad moments after he was been virtually imprisoned for so long.

Although I myself do not agree with Assange about everything, I highly respect for his stand on principle.  It is why he is so hated by the U.S. government:  He cannot be bought, he cannot be terrorized, he cannot be persuaded.  Not unless they can get him bodily under their control.

Speaking of which, the American so-called “prosecution” of Assange raises an issue of world-historical import that I have not seen many others discuss:  By what right does the United States presume jurisdiction over Assange?  He is a not an American citizen, and is thus not generally subject to the personal jurisdiction of American laws.  He is not alleged to have committed any acts within American territorial jurisdiction.  It is only yet another instance of America enforcing international reach for its diktat, on the basis of:  “We have the most guns, we have nukes—and most of all, we have the global poison power of the dollar.”

As for US-USSR being distinct without difference—why yes, I think you’re right.  They’re evil twins.

Credit: AutoCAD co-creator, self-made millionaire, and American expat John Walker

See also:  PSA: If gold were illegal... (Gold WAS illegal!)

Quoting from one of the links in OP:

“Assange impeded Moreno’s ability to seek technical assistance, international loans, and greater security and commercial cooperation with the United States,” says Polga-Hecimovich. All of that was badly needed if Ecuador was going to rebound from Correa’s economic mess.

To remedy the problem, [Lenin] Moreno tacked more to the political center as a way to attract foreign investment. Those efforts were noticed by the United States.

“Prior to your election, our nations had experienced 10 difficult years where our people always felt close but our governments drifted apart,” Vice President Mike Pence said alongside Moreno in Quito, Ecuador’s capital, last June. “But over the past year, Mr. President, thanks to your leadership and the actions that you’ve taken have brought us closer together once again.”

Likely helped, at least in part, by the thawing in relations with the US, Ecuador in March received a $4.2 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund to help rebuild the nation’s economy.

Otherwise stated:  The aptly-named Lenin Moreno sold his country, and sold Julian Assange.  $$$

What can stand against such global, international corruption?

The WikiLeaks Manifesto, a document less known, unfortunately, contains other words of wisdom from Julian: "Only revealed injustice can be answered; for man to do anything intelligent he has to know what's actually going on".

Hmmm...

The non linear effects of leaks on unjust systems of governance

That sounds to me like asymmetrical warfare, with a twist.

The Cypherpunks group emerged initially in 1992 from Eric Hughes, the author of "The Cypherpunk Manifesto", John Gilmore and Timothy May, the author of "The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto". From a former meeting in Gilmore's office, a mailing list was born, under the name of Cypherpunks mailing list.

Thank you, GazetaBitcoin, for your continuing coverage of cypherpunks and the relation thereof to Bitcoin.  To that, I will add a quite decent treatment of that history (with a hyperlink thoughtfully added by me):

The mailing list became the favorite watering hole for hundreds of talented computer programmers and hackers from all over the world, many of whom would use the list to learn about crypto before setting out to pursue May’s vision in their own way.  One of them was a programmer named “Proff,” who joined the cypherpunk mailing list in late 1993 or early 1994.  He immediately got sucked into the raucous and aggressive exchanges that characterized the cypherpunks: insulting newcomers, ruthlessly criticizing perceived shortcomings in others’ technical knowledge, and plotting the downfall of governments....

“Proff,” it transpired, was a gifted young Australian programmer called Julian Assange.  Although Assange was a libertarian, he did not share May’s unashamed elitism:  In the Cyphernomicon May spoke disparagingly of “nonproductive” citizens, “inner-city breeders,” and, most notoriously, the “clueless 95 percent.”  In one of his last posts on the list, Assange wrote (likely in rebuttal to May) that “the 95 percent of the population which compromise the flock have never been my target and neither should they be yours.  It’s the 2.5 percent at either end of the normal that I have in my sights.”  (When I asked May if he thought Assange was a “true” cypherpunk, he replied, “Yes, absolutely. I count him as one of us. He did things, he set things up, and he built things.”)

[koch44]

The whole thing is to silence journalism and Assange is a scapegoat. The deep state wants to punish him for telling the truth.

[odolvlobo]

I am proud to say that after the U.S. pressured banks to cut off Wikileaks, I stepped up and donated 10 BTC. It wasn't worth a lot then, but it is now.

[Cnut237]

Although I myself do not agree with Assange about everything, I highly respect for his stand on principle.  It is why he is so hated by the U.S. government:  He cannot be bought, he cannot be terrorized, he cannot be persuaded.  Not unless they can get him bodily under their control.

I feel the same. He's hugely important, both for what's he's done so far and as a figurehead, but - whether from arrogance or from the unremitting psychological pressure - he has made some stupid decisions. Interesting to compare with Snowden, for example.

He cannot be bought or terrorized, yes. 'Persuaded' is a sub-category of both, and a euphemism.

the American so-called “prosecution” of Assange raises an issue of world-historical import that I have not seen many others discuss:  By what right does the United States presume jurisdiction over Assange?  He is a not an American citizen, and is thus not generally subject to the personal jurisdiction of American laws.  He is not alleged to have committed any acts within American territorial jurisdiction.  It is only yet another instance of America enforcing international reach for its diktat, on the basis of:  “We have the most guns, we have nukes—and most of all, we have the global poison power of the dollar.”

Bought or terrorized. Arguably 'bought' in the context of the US and any international resistance is a sub-category of terrorized. The threat can be implicit or explicit, but is there. Sanctions are only the start of it.
What does the US want? Wealth or power? Money is nothing but a manifestation of power... with this in mind, looking at a US reeling from the reputational damage caused by Assange and the Wikileaks exposures is very much like looking at a wounded predator. Is the US more annoyed by the actual damage or by the affront, by the fact that someone has the temerity to stand up to their global hegemony? If one man is willing to stand against them, then others will do so. Opposition is a threat and must be suppressed. I think the fact that the US is demanding extradition is quite revealing here; they are not calmly sitting in the background awaiting an impartial outcome, it's a show trial with the outcome predetermined due to US pressure. The US is flexing its muscles very publicly: no, we're not damaged, we're still strong, we're still in control. Bluster and posturing is often indicative of underlying insecurity. Assange has them rattled.

Quoting from one of the links in OP:

“Assange impeded Moreno’s ability to seek technical assistance, international loans, and greater security and commercial cooperation with the United States,” says Polga-Hecimovich. All of that was badly needed if Ecuador was going to rebound from Correa’s economic mess.

To remedy the problem, [Lenin] Moreno tacked more to the political center as a way to attract foreign investment. Those efforts were noticed by the United States.

“Prior to your election, our nations had experienced 10 difficult years where our people always felt close but our governments drifted apart,” Vice President Mike Pence said alongside Moreno in Quito, Ecuador’s capital, last June. “But over the past year, Mr. President, thanks to your leadership and the actions that you’ve taken have brought us closer together once again.”

Likely helped, at least in part, by the thawing in relations with the US, Ecuador in March received a $4.2 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund to help rebuild the nation’s economy.

Otherwise stated:  The aptly-named Lenin Moreno sold his country, and sold Julian Assange.  $$$

“Prior to your election, our nations had experienced 10 difficult years where you people didn't do exactly what you were god-damned told,” Vice President Mike Pence implied.
Assange was a fool for coming to the UK. I'm from the UK; we're a vassal state of the US. We are the ally who like a good little puppy eagerly does what we're told; we're the country who can be relied upon to send in a few token tanks so that US unilateral intervention in the middle-east can be painted with a veneer of multilateralism. The Ecuadorian embassy stuff was only ever a delay of the inevitable. Ecuador was bound to buckle eventually under US pressure; they aren't Cuba bolstered by the might of a Soviet Union.

I really hope he gets out of this, but I'm not optimistic. There is quite vocal opposition from a First Amendment perspective, but I can't see this having much sway over a president who sees laws as an irritating inconvenience.

[GazetaBitcoin]

It's hard to say what will happen to him. But nullius pointed out something very important: "By what right does the United States presume jurisdiction over Assange?  He is a not an American citizen, and is thus not generally subject to the personal jurisdiction of American laws.  He is not alleged to have committed any acts within American territorial jurisdiction."

I really wonder how this will be explained during the trial.

I am proud to say that after the U.S. pressured banks to cut off Wikileaks, I stepped up and donated 10 BTC. It wasn't worth a lot then, but it is now.

That's admirable. 10BTC? Wow! Literally wow!

Thank you, GazetaBitcoin.  This is a classic Gazeta post:  I will need some hours to peruse all your links!
<...>
Thank you, GazetaBitcoin, for your continuing coverage of cypherpunks and the relation thereof to Bitcoin.

Hehe, I like that my posts become known for a certain pattern I'll do my best in the future as well. Some cypherpunks retired; other left us for good. But their message lives within us!

[johhnyUA]

As i remember, Julian Assange in his last days was mostly against USA, and not against Russia or China. He was even in cooperation with one of the most propagandist channels of Russia - RussiaToday.

I doubt that he was proKremlin, but with 90 % probability he was, as would say Vladimir Lenin,"a useful idiot" in the service of Russia interests.  Noone even with a best intentions can ally with a bloodthirsty maniacs. 

[Cnut237]

It's hard to say what will happen to him. But nullius pointed out something very important: " By what right does the United States presume jurisdiction over Assange?  He is a not an American citizen, and is thus not generally subject to the personal jurisdiction of American laws.  He is not alleged to have committed any acts within American territorial jurisdiction."

I really wonder how this will be explained during the trial.

I'm no expert, but my naive understanding is: Assange is accused of hacking into US databases and publishing sensitive security information, thereby 'endangering lives', i.e. a crime against the US and US citizens, so answerable in the US. The UK has an extradition treaty with the US, and for the hearing to go ahead, the judge in the UK just needs to be convinced that the alleged crime is one that might have led to trial here, had it occurred in the UK. There is no consideration of guilt here, merely an assessment of the nature of the alleged crime. The US just needs to convince the UK that there is a case that needs answering. I believe there is something in there whereby the UK won't allow extradition where the accused could face the death penalty, but I don't think the US want the death penalty anyway in this instance...

It may be a flimsy pretext, but in practice that doesn't matter. The UK will perform as instructed.

[GazetaBitcoin]

This is called the double standard if morality. What is the stand of the Australian govern regarding his citizen? Do they try to protect him? Or: do they try to take him back in Australia and take the trial there? No! Why?


The following is unknown information for almost all forum members. Maybe just the Romanians know this story.

On December 4th, 2004, 04:30AM local time, the famous Romanian bass player Teo Peter (playing in Compact band) was murdered in a car accident by a drunk US Marine named Christopher Van Goethem. The marine ignored the traffic light and bumped in the car where Teo was present as a passenger. Van Goethem was in his car also with his lover. They were having an affair.

After killing the poor man, the sergeant also fled the premises.

At the moment he was working for the US Embassy, thus having diplomatic immunity.

What happened next? After being captured, US requested his extradition in US, refusing Romanian authorities to take him here in a Court of Law.

What happened in US? The sergeant faced Court Martial but in the end it was stated that he is not guilty for manslaughter charges, nor for adultery (although the adultery accusation was a trivial one compared to the other one). Furthermore, his blood tests concluded he didn't drink alcohool, although he was drunk. Although he admitted he drank a few beers!!! You can read more here or Google the case.


This is the double standard if morality: all people are equal, but some are more equal than others.

One one hand, US govern interdicts to another govern to judge a crime performed by an American citizen; it also rules he is not guilty. And on the other hand, the same US govern forces to judge on American soil the actions of an Australian citizen, living in UK, in the Ecuadorian Embassy, while this man's govern assists powerless to what happens to Assange.

A military who killed a man is sentenced as not guilty, while Assange, who fought all his life for the freedom of information, faces 175 years in jail!!!

[Cnut237]

some are more equal than others.

The US does as it pleases, and everyone else is expected to toe the line. That 2004 case is revealing, but here in the UK we have one from just a few months ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Harry_Dunn

In this instance, Anne Sacoolas, the (US) wife of a US intelligence officer stationed in the UK, crashed into and killed a motorcyclist. The officer's wife admitted that she was responsible and was driving on the wrong side of the road. She fled the UK under diplomatic immunity, and the US rejected the UK's subsequent extradition request. The UK was "disappointed in this decision which appears to be a denial of justice"...

[GazetaBitcoin]

The US does as it pleases, and everyone else is expected to toe the line. That 2004 case is revealing, but here in the UK we have one from just a few months ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Harry_Dunn
<...>

Your example is outstanding! For 2 reasons:

1. This case looks like a copycat to what happened in Romania: an innocent murdered by an US official; the official trial in the country where he / she commited the crime is not allowed; the official goes back to US. A small difference though, at least so far: in your example, the criminal's trial is not over yet. But most likely, she will be free. Why? Because she is the wife of an US official working for the Airforce, because she was a CIA operative, but, most important, for this (quoted from your second link):

A statement from the US State Department said: "At the time the accident occurred, and for the duration of her stay in the UK, the US citizen driver in this case had immunity from criminal jurisdiction.

Basically, they already set her free!

2. I don't know if you noticed, but in your first link is stated the following:

On 23 February 2020, the Dunn family urged the UK government to refuse the extradition request of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange which was made by the US government until they returned Anne Sacoolas back to the UK. They accused the US government of hypocrisy and said that the US had launched an attack on the Special Relationship between both countries.

So the second reason for which your example is outstanding is because this case is connected to the OP, to Assange!!! What were the odds?! Did you notice that in the link?

[Cnut237]

I don't know if you noticed, but in your first link is stated the following:

On 23 February 2020, the Dunn family urged the UK government to refuse the extradition request of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange which was made by the US government until they returned Anne Sacoolas back to the UK. They accused the US government of hypocrisy and said that the US had launched an attack on the Special Relationship between both countries.

So the second reason for which your example is outstanding is because this case is connected to the OP, to Assange!!! What were the odds?! Did you notice that in the link?

Yes, I did know about that, sorry, I should have pointed it out.

The accusation of hypocrisy is an interesting one. It may be a technicality, but I don't think the US is being hypocritical, because that implies some level of concealment of their true motivations and actions. No, the US are quite blatant about all this, it comes from being a global superpower. The UK used to behave the same way a hundred and more years ago, back when we ruled the world. If you are bigger and stronger than everyone else, then there is no need for secrecy or subterfuge; your brute strength already affords you all the advantage that you need. You can be as much of a blunt instrument as you desire.

The term 'special relationship' always makes me wince. I mentioned it in another Assange thread yesterday:

The family of Harry Dunn and various parts of the media in the UK are against extraditing Assange simply on the basis of what many are calling a one-sided extradition treaty

Any interaction between the US and the UK will be one-sided, be it an extradition treaty or a trade deal. This is inevitable given the disparities in power and influence between the two countries. The US is a global superpower. The UK is not. Simply, the UK does as it is told.
If we look at the 'Special Relationship' that exists between the two countries, then the US benefits as the UK is in a strategically important location as the gateway to Europe, in both trade and defence, and the UK is also useful as a military ally so that any US adventurism in say the middle-east seems a tiny bit less unilateral. As for how the UK benefits, well, that's a little more difficult to determine. Perhaps we are first in the queue for any scraps that fall from the US table, perhaps not. This is one reason why Brexit was a bad idea. The UK outside Europe is stripped of much of its negotiating power, and absolutely at the mercy of US interests.

[GazetaBitcoin]

I was not aware of the other thread. And, anyway, the subjects are different. This one is a call for helping Julian, while JollyGood's is a debate about Julian's current situation, when he is behind bars until the extradition trial is over.

I planned my topic for months. It's writing, close to JollyGood's is just a coincidence.

Coming back to the OP, I don't think "people's voice" will change anything. Nor mass media, unfortunately. Look at the petition for freeing Ross Ulbricht, which was signed already by 250.000 people. This petition was supposed to convince Trump to pardon Ross, as the Justice turned its back to him. So what happened, although a quarter of a million of people asked the president to pardon the man? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

[Cnut237]

I was not aware of the other thread. And, anyway, the subjects are different.

Yes, absolutely. I wasn't implying they should be the same thread; yours is completely different. Apologies for any misunderstanding.

I don't think "people's voice" will change anything. Nor mass media, unfortunately. Look at the petition for freeing Ross Ulbricht, which was signed already by 250.000 people. This petition was supposed to convince Trump to pardon Ross, as the Justice turned its back to him. So what happened, although a quarter of a million of people asked the president to pardon the man? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

Yes. Politicians too often serve themselves rather than the people they represent. This coupled with the short-termism inherent in our democracies erodes trust in both politicians and the political process itself. It is by appealing to the baser instincts of disillusioned voters that demagogues like Trump are able to sweep into power.
I'm going to link out again I'm afraid Quarter of a million people is quite a number, but the anti-Iraq-war protests of 2003 are estimated at up to 10 million demonstrators globally... and although there was some impact in some countries, the protests didn't stop the war.
It is so easy for politicians and the establishment to manipulate voters, that they don't need to take any notice of protests - they will justify it all afterwards, or try to direct the public gaze onto other topics. It is important to shine a bright light on the stuff that governments would prefer to remain hidden. This is why people like Julian Assange are so important - and why the implications his extradition have for the First Amendment in the US are so troubling. Democracy is already on its knees; this could be the blow that kills it.

[GazetaBitcoin]

Months have passed and there are no good news about Julian Assange. Actually, the news are worst: he is facing new charges. His bail was denied, although he is very ill, his extradition trial was postponed from May, 18th to September, 7th (which means he will be in jail for a longer time) and prosecutors also accused him for conspiracies with Anonymous hacker group. Australian govern is still not interested about the life of a countryman.

Excepting all these, I updated the OP with three excelent resources for those interested in learning more about Julian and the benefits he offered to this world:

- two books: The Most Dangerous Man In The World: The Inside Story On Julian Assange And WikiLeaks, written by Andrew Fowler and Cypherpunks: Freedom and the Future of the Internet, by Julian Assange. The second book is a discussion between Julian, Jacob Appelbaum (Tor developer) and Jérémie Zimmermann (co-founder of La Quadrature du Net).
- Underground: The Julian Assange story, which is another movie about Julian, depicting his early career.

[rehash]

If telling the truth is a crime we are ruled by criminals.

[GazetaBitcoin]

For the elites (governs, law enforcement agecies, even the Church -- at least in the past), speaking the truth was always considered a crime. Do I need to remind what happened also with Galileo Galilei? E pur si muove! Martin Luther King's theses were translated in various languages and as a result the Church excommunicated him.

There is no difference now. Time passed, but speaking the truth is still forbidden.

[eddie13]

I didn't read all this yet but might later..

I have just been wondering where TF that supposed BTC blockchain staked deadman switch info dump is..

[GazetaBitcoin]

I didn't read all this yet but might later..

I have just been wondering where TF that supposed BTC blockchain staked deadman switch info dump is..

I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand what you meant here. What have you been wondering about? Meaning the part "where TF that supposed BTC blockchain staked deadman switch info dump". What do you mean by "supposed BTC blockchain staked deadman switch info"?