Sunday 16th of December 2018



We all know that the charges of sexual assault against Assange were dropped by Swedish prosecutors, and the charges were a ploy to flush him into the arms of the US mal-justice department. His only crime now is to have skipped bail in the UK. Yet the UK cannot guarantee that he won’t be extradited to the USA, though no official request for such is known — though we know US charges (fictitious or not) against Assange exist.


A bit of respect, please…


The Respect Party, launched 12 years ago as a platform for opposing the Iraq war, has ceased to be [2016]. After it lost its only parliamentary seat in the 2015 election, the party has “voluntarily de-registered” from the Electoral Commission.


The demise of the party has led to much speculation about what the future holds for George Galloway – the man who was the party’s leader and its only ever MP. Many now assume he will attempt to rejoin the Labour Party, which has shifted significantly to the left under Jeremy Corbyn. These two parliamentary stalwarts share many political ideals and fought together against the Iraq war in the early 2000s.


Losing Respect

Respect emerged in 2004 out of the anti-war movement. Galloway was a high profile figure and, within the space of just a few months, the party managed to win a quarter of a million votes in the European parliamentary elections. Galloway himself was almost elected as an MEP in London.

A year later he went one better in the 2005 general election and was elected as MP for Bethnal Green and Bow, a constituency with a large Muslim population. More success followed in the 2006 local elections, when Respect became the official opposition on Tower Hamlets council.

George Galloway has been criticised by anti-rape campaigners after suggesting Julian Assange was accused of nothing more than "bad sexual etiquette":




Mr Assange is wanted in Sweden to face allegations - which he denies - of sexual assault made by two women.

The Respect MP said the women's claims were "totally unproven" and the Wikileaks founder had been "set up".

Rape charity Crisis said Mr Galloway's comments were "offensive" and "deeply concerning".

The UK has said Mr Assange must be extradited to Sweden despite being given political asylum by Ecuador.

Mr Assange remains in the Ecuadorean embassy in London, where he has taken refuge, but the UK has said he will not be given safe passage to the Latin American country.

'Bad manners'

Mr Assange insists that he had consensual sex with each of the women who have made allegations against him.


His legal team has said he wants assurances from the Swedish government that he will not be extradited to the US - where Wikileaks caused a storm last year by publishing thousands of leaked diplomatic cables and correspondence.


Mr Galloway, a frequent critic of the US and UK governments, said Mr Assange's "only crime was to expose, through Wikileaks, malfeasance by states including our own and the US on a truly gargantuan scale".


In a thirty minute podcast, the controversial anti-war MP said it was "an extraordinary coincidence that public enemy number one, Julian Assange, somehow gets inveigled with two women with incredibly complex political backgrounds who just, at the right time, come forward with allegations of sexual misconduct against him".


"Let me tell you, I think that Julian Assange's personal sexual behaviour is sordid, disgusting, and I condemn it," he said.





The Galloway brand

Galloway alienated many people in Respect, especially women. Salma Yaqoob, one of the original founders of Respect, and the party’s other high-profile politician, cut ties with the party in 2012, citing Galloway’s comments about rape allegations made against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange.


But he was electric on the campaign trail and there is little doubt that Respect’s greatest successes were largely due to his charisma and personal appeal – particularly for young Muslim voters.


Galloway couldn’t always pull it off. A shambolic campaign in the Scottish parliamentary election of 2011 (which delivered just 0.35% of the local vote) and his most recent foray into the 2016 London mayoral election (when he won 1.4% of the vote) showed that without the right issues and electorate to exploit, his rhetoric could only get him so far.


His career in politics has been anything but dull. Serving as an MP between 1987-2010 and 2012-2015 he was also a contestant on Celebrity Big Brother and more recently brought out a film about Tony Blair. He is a household name in British politics; something that cannot be said for most of the politicians serving in Corbyn’s present shadow cabinet.


Galloway has always maintained he was “Old Labour”. He even said so in his 2012 by-election victory speech as leader of the Respect Party. He had been expelled from Labour in 2003, for bringing the party into disrepute over his opposition to the Iraq War. But in 2013 there were rumours that he had been in talks with Labour’s then leader, Ed Miliband, to rejoin.








The recent “revelations” by The Guardian’s Luke Harding (quoting anonymous “sources”, see the end of the guardian?... ) show that Assange, despite being holed-up, isolated and deprived of natural rights, is still one of the biggest political players in the world — and any tactic will be used to “shut him up” or taint him with “Russiagate” despite HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH IT — except releasing emails that showed that Hillary Clinton was not above board. 


The establishment, in bed with the “liberal” media and with Hillary Clinton, and the “liberal” media in bed with establishment and Hillary Clinton  — and Trump — are pushing hard to prevent Assange continuing spreading the truth.


Despite all this — and threats to his cat — Assange is patient and true to his word of never revealing sources — which in the case of the Clinton emails would most likely bring further MASSIVE embarrassment to the DNC.


Similarly, George Galloway has had no choice but to join the RT team of commentators, counter-balancing the propaganda rubbish from the Western media (both CONservative and "liberal"), which to say the least were in favour of the war on Saddam. None have apologized for being wrong, apart from the New York Times providing an “apology” that was as pissy as a cat caught doing its business outside its box — and still looking for cuddles.


The truth in these circumstances has little chance of being heard.


The latest kerfuffle in Crimea, with Poroshenko, the president of fascist Ukraine, declaring martial law after provoking an inevitable Russian strong response, being supported by NATO is a farce that would be funny if it was not so dangerously designed to give the West another pretext to go to war.


Our idiot masters, led by Bolton and Pompeo — with Trump being a gesticulating weak pisspot who does not drink alcohol but gets his drugged derangements from salted fast foods and sugary drinks —  are playing Russian roulette and they don’t know the gun is FULLY loaded and facing their own throat. Your throat.


the blair killings...

I’m making the definitive documentary about the Blair years. Years of war and plunder, death and destruction, corruption and disillusion. Tony Blair killed the Labour Party as we knew it. He and George W. Bush helped kill a million people in disastrous wars and Blair is currently making a financial killing out of both.

In 2003, I was expelled from the Labour Party over my outspoken opposition to Bush and Blair’s war in Iraq. I promised that until the last day of my life I would go on fighting to put Tony Blair on trial, a real trial in The Hague, for war crimes and crimes against humanity. This documentary, the mother of all documentaries, will expose Blair’s crimes.

This documentary will not be another sterile chronicle of the Blair years. I witnessed his mendacity firsthand and am able to offer you the inside story. I will pull no punches in going toe to toe with those in the upper echelons of New Labour; the likes of Peter Mandelson and Alistair Campbell are all in my sights and so are the big business bankers he consults for. There is no doubt that the debates will be heated. But from that heat will come light.

I need your help to launch this film. We are trying to raise £50,000 here on this site. This target is the absolute bare minimum we need to complete the research and filming. In total, we will need more than twice that amount to purchase further archive materials, distribute and market the documentary. We are confident that a successful Kickstarter campaign will empower us to match funds from other sources.

This is an all-or-nothing platform. If we don’t raise the full £50,000 in just 40 days, no money changes hands. I hope you will want to be a part of this. You can be the difference to help make history, stop Blair in his tracks, halt his profiteering, and bring him to some kind of justice. It is an ambitious project, but it is not beyond us.

Thank you,


George Galloway MP


see:  film about Tony Blair


See also:

the clinton US craptrap...

It is widely rumored that, with sealed indictments pending in the US, Wikileaks founder and publisher Julian Assange may be imminently forced to leave the Ecuadorian Embassy which has provided him safe refuge since 2012.

However, after a recent visit to Ecuador, US vice president Mike Pence (representing the Cabal) reached an agreement with the Moreno government acknowledging that forcibly expelling Assange was politically untenable.

One can only imagine that if such an expulsion comes to pass, it would likely result in a riot in the streets of London or that drugging Assange and smuggling him out in the middle of the night, under cover of a dark moon would equally result in forceful public demonstrations as well as worldwide condemnation. The Ecuadorians informed Pence they would rather make life inside the Embassy difficult and unsustainable, thereby encouraging Assange to voluntarily vacate the premises. Lots of Luck with that!

There is no way to know if an indictment will be personally served on Assange. For Assange to simply walk out the door and into the arms of a waiting extradition order to the US is indefensible as Assange is facing specious charges of “espionage” for daring to protect free-thinking whistleblowers by publishing their documents that exposed crimes and corruption at the highest levels of the US Government and political system.

The distinction is crucial in that Assange did not steal documents but published documents provided to him just as the New York Times and other national newspapers have done for decades. It will be positively riveting to watch the Trump Administration attempt to indict the NYT, the Washington Post and/or the LA Times for publishing what Wikileaks published.

Enter The Cabal: that deeply embedded, nameless/faceless unelected entity which dictates public policy although they have no public support whatsoever. In agreeing with Moreno, the Cabal has already blinked in the tacit admission that Assange controls the narrative. They are cowardly perpetrators of a simulated reality of war, devastation and poverty and highly vulnerable to an aroused, angry public. It is the Cabal that had the most to lose if Assange was allowed to continue documenting the corrupt, unscrupulous behavior of its toadies.

Not to be confused with the Deep State, although we cannot be certain of where the overlap between these synonymous bastions of criminal malevolence begin and end; yet it is apparent that both control enormous factions of the US government from a dark sinister pit of wickedness; owing their existence to and total dependence on an unworthy claque of self-identified MSM “journalists” who willingly dance on the Empire’s thin ice of righteousness.

It is that collapsing Empire and political structure that have been most accurately depicted in many of the Wikileaks exposes that has stirred the Establishment to vociferously pursue prosecution of Assange. The Democratic party is especially incensed that the Podesta/DNC emails were part of a treasure trove perhaps provided by DNC staffer Seth Rich who was murdered twelve days before the Wikileaks release.

Some Wikileaks contributions that provided the public with unclassified information that should have already been public include:

  • Clinton Foundation received Millions of dollars from the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, both major funders of Islamic terrorists;
  • Secretary of State HRC then approved an $80 billion weapon sale to the Saudis with which they began the war in Yemen in earnest;
  • Goldman Sachs paid HRC $675,000 for one speech; 
  • Secretary of State HRC was the architect for the disastrous war in Libya leading to chaos in Europe; 
  • Vault 7 revelations that the CIA had developed a program to metadata a hack by adding ‘fingerprints’ to ‘prove’ that some other foreign agency had committed the hack.

Ergo, you can see the need to hoodwink the public into believing that Assange is a threat to democracy, an unconstitutional criminal responsible for the 2016 loss of HRC in cahoots with the equally criminal Russian president, Vladimir Putin. It is the work of a poorly contrived fabrication that does not stand up to serious scrutiny – at question is whether the American public, well known for its political apathy and one dimensional thinking, will recognize truth even if they have to gag on it.

There is, however, an undeniable paradigm shift at play here dissolving whatever form, structure or institution no longer represents the public’s best interest. The scandals at the FBI and Department of Justice are but one example of “Deep State” corruption as its very existence remained in the shadows until the 2016 election. It has now been publicly outed as more than speculation and can be viewed as an active appendage of the Cabal. It is difficult to know how deeply buried the Deep State layers go or how far out of reach the country’s make-believe electeds are, many of whom function as consigliere to the Cabal.

Despite the current strategy of denying Assange access to necessary medical care and his legal team, contact with his family and friends as well as removal of all outside world contact through the web and regular daily meals, my money is on Assange to stay the course. Through the integrity he has established himself to be a truth seeker and man of peace who, to his credit, has attracted the same enemies as JFK. His continued resistance, although it appears ‘the resistance’ is absent from an opportunity to truly resist, will do much to encourage another wiseass heroic individual who dares to expose the details of American war crimes.

Despite best efforts by the Cabal, my guess is that against overwhelming odds, he will prevail and he will persevere, he will dig deep and find the inner grit as he has done since 2012 to defy the all powerful who inhabit dark places.


Read more:


Read from top.


See also: 

a troubling foundation...

classic dishonest journalism...

Luke Harding and Dan Collyns, writing in the Guardian, have claimed Paul Manafort (jailed former-campaign chief to Donald Trump) met with Julian Assange, the illegally detained founding editor of WikiLeaks, in the run-up to 2016 Presidential election.

You can read an archived version their article here, just in case The Guardian “amends” their claims in the future (Update – The Guardian has already edited their article to scale back their language. Called it).

Other “news” outlets have, rather predictably, jumped all over it.

WikiLeaks have categorically denied any such meetings took place...


So, is there any truth to the claims? Well, certainly not on the weight of Harding’s article. There is no evidence cited, except for the testimony of anonymous “sources”.

Sources have said Manafort went to see Assange in 2013, 2015 and in spring 2016.

A well-placed source has told the Guardian that Manafort went to see Assange around March 2016.

Manafort’s first visit to the embassy took place a year after Assange sought asylum inside, two sources said.

…is the type of language that fills this article. The claims of these “sources” are never analysed, only accepted.

For example, it is never explained why these visits were never mentioned before. The article refers to the “previously unreported Manafort-Assange connection”, without ever endeavouring to explain WHY it was “previously unreported”.

The Ecuadorian embassy in London has been the most photographed and videoed embassy in the world for the past 8 years – we have footage and/or photographs of visits from Pamela Anderson to John Pilger, and dozens of others.

How did the collected British press, police and security agencies manage to miss not one but FIVE separate visits from the campaign chief of a man running for President of the United States? We don’t know, they never say.

One particularly glaring problem with the narrative supplied by these anonymous “sources” is highlighted by the authors of the article (our emphasis)…

Visitors normally register with embassy security guards and show their passports. Sources in Ecuador, however, say Manafort was not logged.

…but even then the idea the “sources” could be misleading and/or mistaken is never floated. Indeed, rather than interrogating whether or not the claimed meetings happened at all, the authors endeavour to ask why they may have happened. This is not, traditionally, how journalism works.


For all the claims of a Russia/Manafort/Assange connection, possibly the more shocking problem with the article is the near-constant lying by omission.

For example, it states:

WikiLeaks published tens of thousands of emails hacked by the GRU

Without mentioning that both Russia and WikiLeaks have emphatically denied this happened. Julian Assange, and every other representative of WikiLeaks, have always claimed the e-mails were leaked by DNC insiders, not hacked.

Later, the article says:

According to the dossier written by the former MI6 officer Christopher Steele, Manafort was at the centre of a “well-developed conspiracy of cooperation” between the Trump campaign and Russia’s leadership.

They don’t say that the Steele dossier was at least partly funded by Hillary Clinton’s Presidential campaign and the DNC, rendering all of its “findings” completely unreliable and possibly bogus.

This is classic dishonest journalism. Leaving out important information, whilst building its entire case on alleged anonymous “sources”. The tools of the hack with an axe to grind, or a Deep State-backed stenographer just doing what he’s told.

It’s all the Guardian does these days. And all Luke Harding has ever done.

  • If all visitors to Assange need to sign-in and log their passports, why does Manafort’s name not appear in these logs?
  • Why and/or how did the press and police, forever camped outside the Ecuadorian embassy, manage to miss a high-profile Trump aide visiting Assange 5 times?
  • Why would Trump’s DOJ file charges against Assange if they were all part of the same Russian conspiracy?
  • Is this connected to Manafort’s alleged “dishonesty” in his cooperation agreement?
  • Is this a new part of the MSM effort to discredit Julian Assange, a pre-emptive defence of his deportation and show-trial?
  • Will Luke Harding be sued?

We may be updating this piece as information is released. Feel free to discuss below.

UPDATE: 28/5/18

WikiLeaks have announced they are considering suing The Guardian for running a “totally fabricated” story...

Read more:


not worth the paper it's not written on yet...

Britain has provided enough guarantees that Julian Assange will not be extradited to any country where he would face the death penalty if he leaves the Ecuadorian embassy in London, according to Ecuadorian President Lenin Moreno.

Speaking during a radio interview on Thursday, Moreno said his administration has received written assurances that the UK will not extradite Assange to any nation where he will face the death penalty.


Read more:


The UK and their "friends" lie. Until the terms of Assange freedoms are set in concrete (and not concrete boots), one cannot trust any of this yet. And the "not-the-death-penalty" could be "prison forever"... 

fighting cut-and-paste "error"...

MOSCOW (Sputnik) - Barry Pollack, a lawyer of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, has rejected the deal that Ecuadorian President Lenin Moreno said he had struck with the UK authorities, giving the whistleblower guarantees that he can leave the Ecuadorian embassy in London without fearing that he would be put on death row outside the United Kingdom.

"The suggestion that as long as the death penalty is off the table, Mr Assange need not fear persecution is obviously wrong … No one should have to face criminal charges for publishing truthful information … Since such charges appear to have been brought against Mr Assange in the United States, Ecuador should continue to provide him asylum," Pollack told The Telegraph newspaper.

Pollack maintained that the deal announced by Moreno was unacceptable, according to the outlet.


Assange’s lawyer in Ecuador, Carlos Poveda, has told Sputnik that his client was ready to surrender to the UK authorities after receiving written guarantees from London that he would not be extradited to the United States or any other country.

The whistleblower has been living in the Ecuadorian embassy since 2012. Assange has repeatedly suggested he might be apprehended outside the embassy and extradited to the United States.

READ MORE: Assange Readies Lawsuit Over 'Fabricated' Story on Meeting Manafort — Reports

Over the past months, the Ecuadorian authorities have been putting various restrictions on the conditions of Assange’s stay in the embassy, which the whistleblower’s defense called the violation of human rights.


In November, WikiLeaks suggested that the US authorities might have brought sealed charges against Assange, citing a filing in an unrelated case that used Assange's name in an "apparent cut-and-paste error."


Read more:


Read from top.




shooting the messenger...

Julian Assange has accused his Ecuadorean hosts of spying and feeding information to US authorities, and slammed attempts to block his journalistic work as a more subtle way of silencing than the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.

Suggesting there were “facts of espionage” inside the embassy, the WikiLeaks co-founder expressed concern during a hearing in Quito on Wednesday that Ecuadorean intelligence is not only spying on him, but sharing the data it has harvested with the FBI. Ecuadorean intelligence clearly spent a sizable amount of money equipping the embassy for surveillance, Assange added.

He accused Ecuadorean authorities of “comments of a threatening nature” relating to his journalistic work and compared attempts to silence him to the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi, who was tortured and cut up in the Saudi embassy in Istanbul in October, but “more subtle.”  The comparison elicited a harsh reaction from Ecuadorean Prosecutor General Inigo Salvador, who accused Assange of biting the hand that feeds him.


Read more:



Read from top.