Where is Julian Assange now, right now, being held captive? What do we know about the decision of the investigative journalist and Wikileaks founder? What are the circumstances of his detention, what court decisions have been taken on it? What is the state of the extradition request that the United States has submitted to the British government? Who are Assanges lawyers? What do you say? How does the Wikileaks disclosure platform react? Why was Assange deprived of asylum after seven years? Because in this introduction only questions are raised: Why do you think the leading and corporate media do not continuously inform about the Assange case? Why the penetrant silence about a fellow human being who, alongside Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning, has the historical merit of lifting the crimes of the US-led Western community of values into the general knowledge of our time?
Julian assange’s sensational arrest and transported in handcuffs from the Embassy of Ecuador in London, ARD was not able to ignore currently; in the main edition of 20 PM there was the expected Compulsory contributions of two and a half minutes. However, he was sufficiently inclined, and more than the Minimum was not offered. Well, two hours later, the ARD showed a-present trend of journalism in all its shamelessness: The report from the 20 o’clock broadcast was repeated in almost identical Form, of the current follow - up and background reporting could be no question. On the contrary, the topic had already slipped far behind in the “daily topics”, to the fifth place.
Already on the day of the arrest of assange, the daily show gave the impression that the operation was an event among many others, and no special attention value. The ARD-aktuell Department did not seem to have the slightest intention of paying more attention to it than it was absolutely inevitable. What a bad style: a World Scout is arrested, but German quality journalism goes over to the agenda – and the public’s demand for information goes wild.
Let us compare this editorial approach to the journalist deprived of his freedom in the case of another: the German-Turkish Denis Yüzel was in Turkish custody for a year without a charge. ARD-aktuell reported about him in at least 20 major editions of the Tagesschau, namely at the beginning of the affair and for over a week from full pipe, in all formats. Tenor: Fierce criticism of the Turkish state on the one hand, and full of sympathy for the Prisoners on the other side.
Denis Yüzel is an unusual, independent, and not Mainstream-oriented Journalist; his journalistic Work is not enough, nevertheless, by far of assange’s world, politically important work, he has this claim also even. But nevertheless, and typical of ARD-aktuell: while a constant and informative coverage of Assange is omitted, the quality journalists even dedicated a five-minute Film to the Yüzel on the anniversary of his release. Afterwards, a detailed homage followed in the ARD evening program.
It is at the core of the supposedly democratic constitution and the self-image of civil societies, when their journalists are deprived of freedom only because of their professional duties. However, the disparity in the time required for reporting on the Assange and Yüzel repression cases alone makes it clear what there is in the process of dishonesty and that there are two different standards. It also shows where Chief Editor Dr. Gniffke’s quality journalists stand. It is not the Position of independent, strictly objective and critical Guardians of the rule of law and legitimacy of political action. On the contrary.
Rough sketch: The daily showers represent Yücel as arbitrary victims of the undemocratic “enemy state” in Turkey. Assange, on the other hand, is largely spent as a victim of his personal inadequacy, which was basically only granted what was to be expected. However, this view is not guided by the presumption of innocence imposed by the Constitution.
Assange’s role as a Journalist and peace activist is completely hidden. The motive and extent of the eight-year-long, vengeful and all-means persecution by the US government will be withheld from the audience. There is no doubt that Britain spent millions of pounds Sterling around the Ecuadorian embassy and around the clock for years of police surveillance by Assanges. The last time had tagesschau.de about it almost a year ago speculated. Questions about the disproportionate nature of this absurd effort and the underlying motives were not raised at that time or now. The coverage remained typically superficial to the West. About this subject should sway the incompetence in Person, Theresa May prefer to cry and the fool-teller Johnson talk.
With this approach, the ARD editorial team is fully in line with the grand coalition of Merkel-Maas. Together with EU Commission President Juncker and, in contrast to the much less servile President Macron, our Berlin-based Lakaien operate submissive Appeasement policies vis-à-vis the US. this is done in the hope of being spared by US President Trump’s “Sanctionitis”. We know this amoral willingness to do business. It is a characteristic feature of Western politics: economic advantage against humanity, peace-keeping and humanity.
Small excursus to the general: of course, the federal government is aware of the widespread dependence of the German economy on exports. US Special Duties on German cars, machines and pharmaceutical products, combined with further sanctions for German trade with China, Russia and Iran, would turn us Germans into the tap as well as the Venezuelans currently due to the dependence on oil sales – and Chancellor Merkel might be exposed because of “failure of economic policy control and lack of diversification” similar to flat media criticism Attachment and submissiveness may temporarily relieve; they are of course not a recipe for lasting success.
It’s been nine years: in April 2010, Assanges Whistleblower platform Wikileaks published hundreds of thousands of US documents classified as secret. They proved a huge number of international law violations and war crimes of the United States. In collective memory the Video “Collateral Murder”, stuck. It shows how the occupation of a combat helicopter in the Iraq war in 2007 hunting for twelve unarmed civilians, including two Reuters correspondents, and how she finally murdered her victims with machine-gun salves. The soldiers involved had not been punished. In the fall of 2010, Wikileaks was followed by the publication of further documents on violence, torture and murder, committed by the US intervention groups in the Afghanistan war.
Most politicians in the US foamed with anger about the “betrayal”. Foreign Minister Hillary Clinton asked during a Brainstorming on how to deal with the Wikileaks, if Julian Assange could not just “drones”. After all, it is a “relatively soft target” that moves freely and turns the USA a long nose, without fear of harm.
Where was the report of the news conference? It would have been a duty of journalists to remember that Clinton’s outrage at least now, as part of the coverage of Assange’s arrest in London. But nothing like that happened. ARD showed little professional interest in the Wikileaks documentation anyway. The editorial team was consequently dedicated to the propaganda business, not to let a bad light fall on the federal government.
That was challenging enough. In the news, information appeared about what the Americans said about German politicians at gunpoint: Merkel is “rarely creative”, showing no willingness to take risks. It was coated with Teflon. The former development aid minister Niebel was a “slanted choice”, Seehofer” unpredictable”, Schäuble “neurotic”.
The ARD program designers were forced to marginalize what these documents said. Tom Buhrow, a daily presenter at the time, said: “this may be interesting, but the political significance is rather banal.“Such a supple Journalist is, of course, predestined to one day become a General Manager of the largest ARD station WDR, named. On the slime track to success…
Buhrow not demonstrated his contempt for the information of the Public claim in a Closed society. Also, the chancellor noted to the American impudence only:
A large part of what we have learned about us in Germany is part of any better Party, and so we have not been so excited.
Motto: The master gave me a Kick in the ass, but I do now as this was just a little unusual, basically a trivial gesture.
A journalistic clean presentation and critical examination of the susceptibility with which the US Administration and leading US politicians consider the German government would have been urgently needed. She failed. However, our unappetitive Mesalliance from politics and mass media was obviously not a matter of the fact that a fundamental claim to information by the German citizen was rejected in such a way.
The question of quality journalism was obvious in space: how to deal with the Wikileaks revelations in such a way that they do not lead to the revival of an extra-parliamentary Opposition and to pre-revolutionary mass annihilation, as it had happened in 1967/68 in the face of the US atrocities in the Vietnam War? The new journalistic style dictated that crime should not be regarded as a crime and that the perpetrators should not be called criminals; those responsible for all the atrocities should certainly not be named or even denounced publicly. Especially do not understand those circles that beat out any war and mass murder Profit. Consequently, the Assange case was treated so marginally that it could be practically ignored again the day after. The handling of the Wikileaks images of the man-hunting of defenceless civilians in Iraq was style-defining: send and be careful that as soon as possible the next sow can be hunted through the village, so that thoughtfulness or even Protest can not arise.
Tom Buhrow also used veiled vocabulary at the time; the perpetrators and those responsible did not appear in his depictions, but everything sounded right and beautiful: “cruelty of war”, “failures” and “a tightrope between restraint and overreaction”. That’s how you do it. Thus, one creates the impression that crime is a quasi-natural-catastrophic individual event and not the deliberate work of state-protected killers in Uniform. There is something fateful and not a systematic, planned war crime that is both symptomatic and typical of the West.
The US killers in the helicopter and their disgusting amusement about their murderous drive, ARD-aktuell even indirectly apologized by an expert of the Brookings Institution: “these are often very young Kids in vulnerable areas.“The Poorest! You have to understand that they kill a bit, don’t you? War is war… Similar compassion with the massacres on the ground was not felt in this newsreel.
There were documents published by Wikileaks, field reports of military personnel in Iraq. It refers to the targeted murder of 15 000 civilians. At that time, however, the Gniffke force relativized:
The documents - field reports from US soldiers - are not objective. They are single-sided and not verifiable. Nevertheless, The worldwide interest in the documents is large. Oh, yeah?
The fact that a massive campaign against the Wikileaks publisher Assange was already running at the time of the publications mentioned here was to be suspected, but not yet obvious. It was not until the US payment systems Visa, Mastercard and Paypal got under political pressure at the end of 2010 and no more donations to Wikileaks forwarded. A Mastercard spokesman at the time explained this by the fact that one would not” directly or indirectly support or facilitate illegal activities”.
It was clear that the US government was not prepared to pursue the war crimes denounced by Wikileaks, but was willing to open up the hunt for Assange and its platform: hold the thief! it was called the slogan. It was issued by mass murderers and seized by mass media. One fit the other.
Assange was accused of rape in Sweden. The indictment, although not very proof and based on a longer past incident – Assange spoke of consensual Sex, it had only given much later a knockdown with his then partner-after all filed for an arrest warrant. It was also sufficient, presumption of innocence back or forth, even the Journaille to restrict their Until now close cooperation with Wikileaks. The British Guardian, The New York Times and the Spiegel went away. Wikileaks was deprived of public attention a considerable distance.
It came to the media turning necks is very convenient that the former Assange-friend Domscheid-mountain practiced public criticism of Wikileaks and Assange. This helped to distract even further from the highly explosive content of the documents. Daniel Domscheit-Berg may have had good or bad reasons to leave Wikileaks; the verdict on him has long been passed by the public. He failed brilliantly with his attempt to attract a competitor to Wikileaks. There was no interest in its open-Leaks platform from the Start.
As a result of this, it was not possible to find a solution to the problem, but rather to find a solution to the problem. From the former hero, the crowd made a sovereign and ruthless egomaniac. It couldn’t surprise his friends any more. “We knew that the primary weapon of the United States and its allies would be the media that were reverent and close to governments.”
It was only a matter of reproaching that Assange was a Russia worker or even a creature of the Moscow Secret Service, in order to discredit him definitively and make him a persona non grata. As seen so happen: on time for the US election campaign in 2016, this environmental poison was actually sprayed. What Wonder, even ARD-aktuell participated in all these campaigns at the service of Assange-enemy, because of him exposed elites.
The report on Assange’s arrest at the London embassy in Ecuador on 11 September 2014 April is only the preliminary peak of biased and discriminatory reporting of the quality Journal in the ARD-aktuell.
The background of the arrest was a violation of the bail requirements at the 2012 trial.
This is artistic concealment, because the “violation” was not a “background”, but was merely a pretext for the British authorities: Julian Assange was supposed to be imprisoned in the Belmarsh high security prison in eastern London, according to BBC, the “British version of Guantanamo” (14), where he is completely isolated from any critical view of the public. Of course, such an uneasiness was in need of explanation.
The actual “background” of the arrest is undoubtedly the need for revenge and self - defense of American politicians and their backers. They want to attack Assange with the help of their “English Pudel” (= British government) and how the whistleblower Chelsea Manning locked away for years. And it is under conditions of isolation, which are done to drive every person into madness, to destroy him physically and mentally.
The other motive of this cruelty is to set a worldwide example: well-understood freedom of the Press does not exist. The media always have to submit to the US power interest.
The fact that Julian Assange is entered into a high – security tract because of a legal Lappalie – infringement of bail requirements-is a arbitrariness of special kind, incompatible with rule of law principles. The fact that Assange violated the reporting requirements in 2012 does not justify a legally justifiable aspect of the current strange, especially since the Swedish judiciary has long since lifted the former arrest warrant. However, newsreels and supporters did not take into account the mismatch between accusation of guilt and official reaction.
From the beginning, the commitment of the English authorities was unusual. It seems unexplained at first sight that Assange was initially able to leave Sweden without interrogation, but was then pursued with disproportionate intensity in the UK. At the second glance, it raises the urgent suspicion that it was never Assange’s alleged sexual misconduct and thus justifiable criminal worthiness, but to let him go up because of the publication of the Wikileaks documents and to create out of the way.
It should be borne in mind that in Sweden, detention and subsequent extradition procedures to the United States would have been far from as smoothly as is now apparent in the United Kingdom.
ARD - " quality journalists “talked about an"involuntary end of the embassy exile”. (15) as subtle as it is primitive, it is suggested that Julian Assange had ultimately stayed for seven years at the Ecuadorian embassy in London for his own free decision, mind you, in “exile”, not in asylum. The formulation is a proof that it is ARD-currently not for objective reporting, but to do opinion matter against Assange.
The Tagesschau is increasingly pursuing this Intention by broadening the position of the Ecuadorian government. President Lenin Moreno’s decision to withdraw Assange’s Ecuadorian citizenship and to deny him asylum appears in ARD-aktuell-reporting as a legally correct decision. The “International Association of lawyers for Peace” made clear that Moreno’s approach was to be regarded as extremely shady and a breach of law. In contrast to the “Pro-Western” days of the IALANA language clear text. Because the facts mentioned by her were not taken up by the corporate mass media, this must be done here in detail:
“Assange had been granted asylum at the London embassy in 2012 by then President Correa. In addition, the embassy building was secured against a feared illegal intrusion by the British authorities. After the election of the new President Lenin Moreno in 2017, the procedure changed: now the government wanted Assange out of the embassy. … Yesterday Assange was denied refugee status without warning – in violation of the Geneva Convention on refugees, which lays down strict conditions for this, which did not exist. Furthermore, the obligation of prior consultation with the opportunity to appeal was infringed. Then the ambassador let the British police into the embassy building, to arrest Assange surprisingly and forcibly bring out. And finally, Ecuador subsequently dismissed Assange’s nationality, after it had previously extradited its own nationals, which was, for example, in the FRG by Article 16 Para.2 of the Basic Law and also in many countries of South America is expressly prohibited or at least unthinkable.”
ARD-pretends that the US extradition request is unproblematic because it has been assured that it will only prosecute a criminal offence for which no more than five years ' imprisonment is possible. However, what is worth a promise from the men in the White House in Washington and that the US is willing to break treaties and international law at every opportunity (“America first”), is likely to be well known.
It may, however, help to recall that the Iran agreement, which has been terminated without cause, the threat of violence against the International Criminal Court in The Hague in the case of an indictment of US citizens, or the fate of the German brothers Legrand, was mentioned here, which, contrary to international law, the trial was conducted in Arizona without consular assistance in 1999; in the end, they were executed. An interim order of the International Court of justice in The Hague of 3 December 1999 was issued. The US authorities had failed to comply with the decision to postpone enforcement on 15 March 1999.
No mention, not even in the Web Forum tagesschau.de at ARD-aktuell, the involvement of Ecuadorian President Moreno in an extensive bribe affair was found as a motive for his aggressive role in the fight against Assange.
In the spring of 2019 Wikileaks had reported on the so-called “INA-Papers”, which had passed through an organization called “La Fuente”. This is a series of documents that contain clear indications of illegal business Morenos. They show bribes related to the construction of a hydroelectric power plant; part of the black money allegedly flowed into accounts of an Offshore company called INA Investments Corp. In an Interview, Ecuador’s Ex-president Correa described his successor Moreno as an evil traitor for his decision to lift the asylum for Assange. “He could compete with Judas.”
None of this in the ARD, or other German media.
Two days after Assange’s arrest, Moreno had received a very unusual increase by a further $ 500 million from the World Bank on an already promised loan of $ 350 million. This led to the suspicion that Moreno had agreed with the leading lenders from the US, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to trade “Assange for loans”. The former Foreign Minister of Ecuador, Ricardo Patiño, also saw this connection.
However, such special features also contained the Newsreel. You as a Lord and Keeper of the seals of a higher morality of the Western community of values. It does not even give the impression that the arrest and possible extradition of Assange and all the disillusionment with him bow international law and undermine the freedom of the press.
It is only logical that the bad role of German politicians has not received a critical response in ARD’s reporting. Government and large sections of Parliament had taken every opportunity to prove themselves as inhumane right-wing Civilists and ignorant democracies, even in the Assange case.
As Heike Hansel, deputy of the left, on 19. The German government had to act to ensure that the Wikileaks publisher had been blocked from contact and that he could not be visited for eight months, because SPD minister of State Roth said that the Ecuadorian government had already spent 6 million euros on asylum in the embassy. An action for the conditions for Assange’s stay at the embassy had been dismissed by a court in Ecuador. In addition, this hero of the modern social democratic workers ' movement and campaigners for the oppressed and disenfranchised made it clear that he wanted nothing but nothing because of the (at the time already) imminent arrest of Assange. The problem can only be solved by England and Ecuador.
Of all our 707 so-called representatives of the people, only two women have indicated on the spot, namely in London, what is to be kept from the illegal and scandalous action against Assange, supporters of freedom of information: Heike Hansel and Sevim Dagdelen (the left). They were joined by MEP Ana Miranda (group of the Greens/European Free Alliance). But recognition, to whom it deserves: after all, had already three days before the action in London, on 12. On April 22, in Berlin outside parliament, several members of the Left party for Assanges release demonstrated, including Dieter Dehm and Gesine Lötzsch, as well as Hänsel and Dagdelen.
They showed solidarity with Assange. The great Rest of the people’s representation looked away and remained silent. The greens in the Bundestag also maintained a roaring silence. Ladies and gentlemen of the former human rights and Peace Party, Mr robben, are in the process of taking part in the federal government in the near future.
Of course, this is best for bellies. At this lowest level, there are many creepers and spineless politicians and mass media – including those of ARDl. From a frog’s perspective, their quality journalists let us look at their World. Fortunately, we are not limited to, your angle of view.