New York court: Spanish company and the CIA found guilty of violating rights of Julian Assange’s visitors
New York court: Spanish company and the CIA found guilty of violating rights of Julian Assange’s visitors
A New York court ruled that a former Spanish military officer illegally surveilled people visiting the activist at the Ecuadorian embassy in London
A court in New York has ruled that UC Global and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) violated the constitutional rights and privacy of U.S. citizens when they met with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange at Ecuador’s embassy in London.
Four U.S. citizens — two lawyers and two journalists — had sued former CIA Director Mike Pompeo, the CIA and David Morales, a former Special Forces soldier in the Spanish military who owned a Spanish surveillance firm that was contracted to provide security for the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.
David Morales, a former Special Forces soldier in the Spanish military who owned a Spanish surveillance firm that was contracted to provide security for the Ecuadorian Embassy in London
To be clear: when they say Morales, they're talking about the Spanish for-profit surveillance guy, not to be confused with the president of Bolivia Evo Morales.
For a second I thought this was a back stab by Latin America, whew. Nope, just the US doing its illicit shenanigans.
Ehm.. what about Julian Assange himself?
Julian Assange’s forthcoming hearings and what they could mean for his freedom
The announcement of what could be Julian Assange’s final hearings – on 20 and 21 February before the British High Court – has sparked a flurry of speculation about what could be the final fate of the now 52-year-old Australian journalist and publisher, who has been imprisoned in London for four years while awaiting extradition to the United States where 175 years of supermax almost certainly await him.
But how is it possible that Assange can be jailed for 175 years, just for doing what any responsible journalist and editor should always do – that is, disclose war crimes and other wrongdoings he or she learns about by way of spontaneous witnesses? Especially since the US Supreme Court ruled in 1971 that it is permissible to reveal state secrets if it is in the public interest to do so?