I suppose Assange made that book simply to get money, while he is in this difficult situation.

At around 2.30pm Assange emerged on to the balcony, a pallid figure dressed in a business-blue shirt and maroon tie. There was an enormous roar. Assange managed a thumbs-up, then tapped the microphone and inquired: "Can you hear me?" This, perhaps, was the moment for someone to shout: "'E's not the Messiah! 'E's a very naughty boy!" But from the Met officers there was a gloomy silence.

In 2012, after the leak of internal emails of the United States strategic intelligence company Stratfor, Wikileaks said in a press release: "Private intelligence staff who align themselves closely with U.S. government policies and channel tips to the Mossad – including through an information mule in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, Yossi Melman, who conspired with Guardian journalist David Leigh to secretly, and in violation of WikiLeaks' contract with the Guardian, move WikiLeaks' U.S. diplomatic cables to Israel."

chandrakavi wrote:
It is a book ABOUT Assange and Wikileaks. It is not a book BY Assange and Wikileaks.

The writers are Alan Rusbridger, David Leigh and Luke Harding and the publisher is The Guardian (Guardian Books).

I sincerely doubt Julain made much money out of that. Instead he has had a very unsympathetic Biography written about him by a paper that has published a lot in an effort to smear hima nd land him in a cell for the rest of his life.

Alan Rusbridger is the editor of The Guardian.
David Leigh is the executive editor of the Guardian.
Luke Harding is the Guardian hack that has been writing a lot of the hachet jobs in recent articles in the Guardian.

www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/aug/19/jul...olivar-knightsbridge

The rest of the article is much the same: hostile and vaccuous.


Assange has already denounced these men as actively taking part in a plot to smear himself and wikileaks.

And then there is this:
It was Lee and Harding that disclosed the wikileaks password of the cables that landed Manning in prison.

So no, I don't think they are gonna give Assange a penny.

the c+nts

So now the UK Foreign Offiice is reported to have withdrawn its threat to revoke diplomatic satus of the Ecuadorean Embassy.

Maybe they didn't want to further sour UK-Latin American relations.

Every British Embassy from Mexico City to Bueons Aires must have been shitting themselves.

"Operation Free Assange’: Anonymous take down Interpol website"

Hactivist group Anonymous claims to have taken down the websites of Interpol and a British police force as part of a campaign calling for the freedom of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

Several Twitter accounts associated with the loose-knit Anonymous collective have announced that the website of International Criminal Police Organization was taken down. The site was unavailable as of 9:18 pm GMT on Sunday but resumed functioning soon after.


The hackers also claim to have taken down the website of the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA), a UK police unit responsible for operations against serious and organized crime.

Assange, the founder and editor of whistleblower website WikiLeaks, has been ordered by Swedish authorities to be extradited from the UK where he had been under house arrest. Two women from Sweden have accused Assange of sex crimes, although he has yet to be charged.

In fear of being sent to Sweden and then extradited to the US to be tried for his role with WikiLeaks, Assange applied for political asylum in Ecuador, which the Latin American country finally granted him earlier this month.

Regardless, British authorities have refused to give Assange safe passage out of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London so that he may travel overseas.

Australia offers consular assistance to Julian Assange

Aug 17, 2012
Melbourne: Australia today said that consular assistance is still available to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who was granted asylum by Ecuador and is currently holed up in the South American country’s embassy in London.

“Julian Assange is an Australian citizen …if he wants consular support, it’s offered, it’s available,” the Environment Minister Tony Burke said today. According to an AAP report, Burke said consular assistance would still be available to the 41-year-old Assange if he asked for it.

Australia has offered to provide consular support to Assange.

“The offer of consular assistance is still there,” he said. The minister further said that Assange however had not contacted the officials. The Australian government had not yet had any contact with Ecuadorian officials about the diplomatic stand-off, he said.

“We’ve put some calls in this morning but we haven’t been able to confirm that any contact has been made,” Burke said. Meanwhile, Assange’s defence team member Geoffrey Robertson told local media here that Australia should help him in escaping Ecuador’s London embassy.

“The Ecuadorians have been questioning the Americans, the Swedes and the British but the obvious country, the country of Assange’s nationality, hasn’t been involved,” Human Rights lawyer Robertson said.

“So it may be an opportunity for Australia to get involved on behalf of its national and see if it can square this circle,” he added. Robertson said well-intentioned people wanted Assange to face the allegations in Sweden as long as there wasn’t a risk that he’d be transferred to the US.

Ecuador yesterday granted political asylum to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, setting stage for an unprecedented diplomatic stand-off with the UK, which has threatened to extradite him to Sweden come what may.

Assange dramatically sought refuge in the Ecuadoran embassy in London to evade extradition to Sweden to face sexual assault charges. Assange has ruffled many feathers by publishing classified diplomatic correspondence of the United States and other countries.

PTI

If Sweden actually wants Assange for the criminal investigation then it can offer him guarantee that he won't be extradited elsewhere, simples.
The fact they won't speaks volumes.

New York Times

-

WikiLeaks and Free Speech
By MICHAEL MOORE and OLIVER STONE
Published: August 20, 2012

WE have spent our careers as filmmakers making the case that the news media in the United States often fail to inform Americans about the uglier actions of our own government. We therefore have been deeply grateful for the accomplishments of WikiLeaks, and applaud Ecuador’s decision to grant diplomatic asylum to its founder, Julian Assange, who is now living in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London.
Enlarge This Image
Keith Negley

Related

Assange Accuses U.S. of a ‘Witch Hunt’ (August 20, 2012)
Ecuador Grants Asylum to Assange, Defying Britain (August 17, 2012)
Times Topic: WikiLeaks

Related in Opinion

Op-Ed Contributor: It’s Not About Assange (August 20, 2012)

Opinion Twitter Logo.
Connect With Us on Twitter

For Op-Ed, follow @nytopinion and to hear from the editorial page editor, Andrew Rosenthal, follow @andyrNYT.

Ecuador has acted in accordance with important principles of international human rights. Indeed, nothing could demonstrate the appropriateness of Ecuador’s action more than the British government’s threat to violate a sacrosanct principle of diplomatic relations and invade the embassy to arrest Mr. Assange.

Since WikiLeaks’ founding, it has revealed the “Collateral Murder” footage that shows the seemingly indiscriminate killing of Baghdad civilians by a United States Apache attack helicopter; further fine-grained detail about the true face of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars; United States collusion with Yemen’s dictatorship to conceal our responsibility for bombing strikes there; the Obama administration’s pressure on other nations not to prosecute Bush-era officials for torture; and much more.

Predictably, the response from those who would prefer that Americans remain in the dark has been ferocious. Top elected leaders from both parties have called Mr. Assange a “high-tech terrorist.” And Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who leads the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, has demanded that he be prosecuted under the Espionage Act. Most Americans, Britons and Swedes are unaware that Sweden has not formally charged Mr. Assange with any crime. Rather, it has issued a warrant for his arrest to question him about allegations of sexual assault in 2010.

All such allegations must be thoroughly investigated before Mr. Assange moves to a country that might put him beyond the reach of the Swedish justice system. But it is the British and Swedish governments that stand in the way of an investigation, not Mr. Assange.

Swedish authorities have traveled to other countries to conduct interrogations when needed, and the WikiLeaks founder has made clear his willingness to be questioned in London. Moreover, the Ecuadorean government made a direct offer to Sweden to allow Mr. Assange to be interviewed within Ecuador’s embassy. In both instances, Sweden refused.

Mr. Assange has also committed to traveling to Sweden immediately if the Swedish government pledges that it will not extradite him to the United States. Swedish officials have shown no interest in exploring this proposal, and Foreign Minister Carl Bildt recently told a legal adviser to Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks unequivocally that Sweden would not make such a pledge. The British government would also have the right under the relevant treaty to prevent Mr. Assange’s extradition to the United States from Sweden, and has also refused to pledge that it would use this power. Ecuador’s attempts to facilitate that arrangement with both governments were rejected.

Taken together, the British and Swedish governments’ actions suggest to us that their real agenda is to get Mr. Assange to Sweden. Because of treaty and other considerations, he probably could be more easily extradited from there to the United States to face charges. Mr. Assange has every reason to fear such an outcome.The Justice Department recently confirmed that it was continuing to investigate WikiLeaks, and just-disclosed Australian government documents from this past February state that “the U.S. investigation into possible criminal conduct by Mr. Assange has been ongoing for more than a year.” WikiLeaks itself has published e-mails from Stratfor, a private intelligence corporation, which state that a grand jury has already returned a sealed indictment of Mr. Assange. And history indicates Sweden would buckle to any pressure from the United States to hand over Mr. Assange. In 2001 the Swedish government delivered two Egyptians seeking asylum to the C.I.A., which rendered them to the Mubarak regime, which tortured them.

If Mr. Assange is extradited to the United States, the consequences will reverberate for years around the world. Mr. Assange is not an American citizen, and none of his actions have taken place on American soil. If the United States can prosecute a journalist in these circumstances, the governments of Russia or China could, by the same logic, demand that foreign reporters anywhere on earth be extradited for violating their laws. The setting of such a precedent should deeply concern everyone, admirers of WikiLeaks or not.

We urge the people of Britain and Sweden to demand that their governments answer some basic questions: Why do the Swedish authorities refuse to question Mr. Assange in London? And why can neither government promise that Mr. Assange will not be extradited to the United States? The citizens of Britain and Sweden have a rare opportunity to make a stand for free speech on behalf of the entire globe.

Michael Moore and Oliver Stone are Academy Award-winning filmmakers.

I went to check occupy news and this is what greeted me on Ustream.TV: