Subject was: Response to Robert Chernenko on Ukraine nuclear etc - Ed

Robert Chernenko wrote above recently

[...]. Biolabs are everywhere. Australia has thousands of them. I've worked in crop research biolabs. Obviously many biolabs work on animal, plant and human pathogens that have security protocols that could be disrupted by war, as well as proprietary information. 

He ignored the fact that the United States has for decades refused any independent investigation of the biolabs it funds, which makes them illegal. He shows no curiosity or alarm at the detailed and documented reports of bio-weapon designs and projects in Ukraine and many other countries, nor, for example, their funding in Ukraine by the United States President's son, Hunter Biden - which we have noted here: https://www.candobetter.net/admin/blog/6335/illegal-us-bio-weapons-programs-ukraine-georgia-and-elsewhere-evidence-given-un. See also https://www.candobetter.net/taxonomy/term/6017. 

So, without dealing with the alarming context of these biolabs, he changes tactic and says that Russia does not place a high value on safety, then quotes an article in The Guardian, dated 1 May 2022. That paper simply reported what it had heard from the Ukrainians, without balancing it with the Russian response.

However, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report, dated 24 February – 28 April 2022, says that, "On 4 March, Ukraine informed the IAEA that Russian forces had taken control of the Zaporizhzhya NPP site. Ukraine reported that the facility’s training centre — located a few hundred metres from the reactor units — had been hit by a projectile and a localized fire had broken out that was later extinguished." (Source: IAEA Summary Report by the Director General 24 February – 28 April 2022.) What the report avoids saying is that the Russians reported that Ukrainian soldiers had caused the fire.  There is also an allusion to a laboratory having been trashed, but another report by the Russians shows that no vital equipment was damaged and it looked as if the sabotage had been mainly cosmetic, in order to try to implicate the Russians.  That report has to stand until the west finds evidence to the contrary. 

A later version of the Guardian article (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/01/russians-fled-chernobyl-with-radiation-sickness-says-ukraine-as-iaea-investigates) of the same date, was balanced with some  comments from the IAEA Director General Grossi. In the IAEA report on the matter, it says that the IAEA was unable to confirm reports of high radiation doses to Russian soldiers. 

Robert wrote:

It is clear the Russians don't place a high value on safety.  The Russians didn't bother with safety issues when they occupied the damaged Chernobyl plant and subjected the Ukrainian workers and their own soldiers to health risks.  Radiation sickness is now a problem for their soldiers.   See for instance www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/apr/01/first-thing-russians-flee-chernobyl-with-radiation-sickness-says-ukraine

Robert's above statement and conclusions are contradicted by the IAEA report:

"Radiation monitoring: Radiation monitoring data from the Chornobyl site, regularly provided through the online radiation monitoring system, have not been received through the International Radiation Monitoring Information System (IRMIS) since 24 February. However, the SNRIU has reported some radiation measurements from the Chornobyl site. Some of these measurements from the Chornobyl Exclusion Zone indicated an increase in the gamma dose rates that was attributed to the displacement of soil due to heavy machinery movements in the area. Based on these data, the IAEA assessed radiation levels as low and within the operational range measured in the exclusion zone since it was established, and therefore considered that they posed no hazard to the public. In the absence of relevant data or observations, the IAEA has not been able to confirm reports of Russian forces receiving high doses of radiation while being in the Chornobyl Exclusion Zone. "

The Director General of the IAEA has taken an apparently very pro-Ukrainian approach, and has even been seen shaking hands with the Ukraine President Zelensky.  Whilst he implies that Ukrainians did all the work, nevertheless, his reports admit that the Russians withdrew and left management of the plants to their Ukrainian teams, having restored power to Ukraine, leaving no pressing nuclear problems or safety issues.

Robert wrote:

What I find far more convincing is the dozens of fact checks by groups like NPR that clearly refute and give background on the Russian claim of US bioweapon labs in Ukraine:  wwwDOTtheguardianDOTcom/us-news/2022/apr/01/first-thing-russians-flee-chernobyl-with-radiation-sickness-says-ukraine  

Unfortunately Robert has given the Guardian story about 'radiation sickness' again, instead of the reference he wanted to give.  However we cannot take what the US National Public Radio (NPR) says for gospel, just because it is the NPR, or because it may quote some 'authorative' figure. One has to carefully examine the statements, the evidence, the logic, and whether the opinion of the other side has been sought and reported. From what I have seen, the NPR is in war-mode like the rest of the US press and reports all Russian perspectives as if they were laughable, and attacks anyone prominent who doesn't. This is not serious journalism.

Robert wrote:

 

I have absolutely no interest in rebutting what the Bulgarian "journalist" Dilyana Gaytandzhieva, who pushes anti-Western pro-Kremlin lies has to say in a blog. Why would anyone?

Robert should look at what Dilyana Gaytandzhieva actually writes and says before he cancels her, instead of just doubting her on the say-so of western propaganda. The fact that there are professional character assassination pieces all over the web about Dilyana Gaytandzhieva means one should look very carefully at what she is saying, because the purpose of those attacks is to make you look away from what she is saying.  She is being seriously attacked because she has seriously documented US provision of arms to terrorists in Syria, for instance. This is not news to anyone who has talked with Syrians in Syria and, if people look at our site, they will see that we have been covering Syria for some time, and with local reporting as well.  Anyone who exposes US war-crimes gets that kind of treatment if they are at all successful.  Look at what the United States and the UK are doing to Julian Assange.  That should be enough to make anyone severely doubt the honour of your government and of the western press.

Robert wrote:

As Brandolinis Law notes, "the amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude larger than to produce it."  

Yes, I can relate to that here.

Robert wrote:

I note, however, that Gaytandzhieva has been called out by moderate centre left sources like the "The Guardian" for pushing Kremlin narratives.  

So, if the Guardian says it, you automatically believe it?

Robert wrote:

[...] Vladimir Putin is a violent murderous war-mongering criminal who has nipped Russia's budding democracy in the bud, waged war against his neighbours and killed, poisoned, murdered and chased out of Russia nearly all independent voices, including the press. What is wrong with you? Why does this blog lionise far-right dictators like Putin and fascist politicians like Marine Le Pen? 

The west says that Putin has poisoned the Skripals, brought down MH17, poisoned Navalny, censored the news, waged war against his neighbours, etc etc.  Somehow the western press and the leaders whose opinions it reports all know immediately what poisons were used, who administered them, who shot planes down, almost before these things happen.  They never allow Russia to participate in their investigations, and they use these confected incidents as fodder for continuous anti-Russia propaganda.  Much of the time, they imply that Russia is actually the same as the [defunct] USSR.  And when Robert talks about Russia invading its neighbours, I suspect he also thinks that.

The west uses and abuses international sport and international commemorations of WW2 to drum this propaganda in. It is so ridiculous, anyone awake has to be suspicious. 

And what is the motive of US-NATO in this propaganda? It is so they can say, to anyone who criticises the west's own serial invasions and continuous warmongering, that this is all Russian 'disinformation'.  They imprisoned Julian Assange for telling the truth.  Yet Australians are supposed to believe that Russia just invaded Ukraine for no reason at all.  And to put up with blanket censorship to back the lies up.

Even the Pope questions the narrative:

"Pope Francis has said that NATO’s eastward expansion may have provoked Russian President Vladimir Putin into launching an attack against Ukraine. In an interview published on Tuesday by Italian daily Corriere Della Sera, the pontiff speculated that “the barking of NATO at Russia’s door” could have driven Putin into launching the military campaign on February 24. “I can’t say if it was provoked, but perhaps, yes,” he said.  (Original Italian:
"La preoccupazione di papa Francesco è che Putin, per il momento, non si fermerà. Tenta anche di ragionare sulle radici di questo comportamento, sulle motivazioni che lo spingono a una guerra così brutale. Forse «l’abbaiare della Nato alla porta della Russia» ha indotto il capo del Cremlino a reagire male e a scatenare il conflitto. «Un’ira che non so dire se sia stata provocata — si interroga —, ma facilitata forse sì». "(Source: Intervista a Papa Francesco: «Putin non si ferma, voglio incontrarlo a Mosca. Ora non vado a Kiev», Corriere del sera, 3 March 2022, https://www.corriere.it/cronache/22_maggio_03/intervista-papa-francesco-putin-694c35f0-ca57-11ec-829f-386f144a5eff.shtml)

Whilst Russia may have committed crimes, I cannot take those reported by our press seriously, because they make so little sense.  The crimes of the west, however, have been very carefully investigated by people who have had to flee for their lives or have faced prison - Daniel Ellsberg, Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, and many others - see for instance https://www.employmentlawgroup.com/timeline-us-whistleblowing/ I did not wake up one day and decide I wanted to embrace Russia, or Syria, but I did come to realise, decades ago, that most of what I read in the paper/saw on TV and heard from politicians was seriously limited and distorted, and reflected very little of what people actually thought or cared about.  I read more than one language and look at various media outlets from all over the world - something that is actually possible these days with the internet, but which US-NATO and allied governments have been trying to prevent.

Robert Chernenko wrote:

I have absolutely no interest in rebutting what the Bulgarian "journalist" Dilyana Gaytandzhieva, who pushes anti-Western pro-Kremlin lies has to say in a blog. Why would anyone? As Brandolinis Law notes, "the amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude larger than to produce it."

In order to show to me that Dilyana Gaytandzhieva is not as authoritative as I believe her to be then, surely you only need find one specific claim somewhere in one of her articles and produce evidence that refutes that claim. How would require, on your part, more than a small fraction of the effort Dilyana put into writing any one of her articles, let alone an "order of magnitude" more? The fact that you have not shows me that either your grasp of science is insufficient to understand her articles or that you have not been able to find in her articles even one claim that you are able to debunk.

Regarding Vladimir Putin, presumably you preferred Russia the way it was, when it was ruled by Boris Yeltsin. I will deal with your smearing of Vladimir Putin some other time.

On JFK, I am curious to whether or not you believe that Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK with his 'magic bullet' on 22 November 1963.

Huge demos in Lahore, Peshawar and Karachi against the coup in Pakistan. Massive support for Imran Khan and anger against the corrupt political mafias and generals that unseated him with US support. Khan is a radical new voice of the people pursuing an independent foreign policy. pic.twitter.com/sifKdGy5FX

— Martin Jacques (@martjacques) April 23, 2022

60 Minutes: Senator Wilkie says Scott Morrison and Anthony Albanese both need to ask US to let Assange go (9 April 2022)

Andrew Wilkie interviewed by 60 Minutes, says Scott Morrison should ask Biden to free Julian, and so should Anthony Albanese, especially in view of our new close relationship to the US. Full @60Mins Report: https://t.co/VWMMfa2HhH https://t.co/B1laR7RhUX

https://www.facebook.com/tara.cummins.7712/videos/400611008153432/

Irish Senator Paul Gavin lambasts UK Gov for cowardly 'no comment' on Julian Assange plight

Senator Gavan points out the appalling hypocrisy of the British Government, in its treatment of the human rights of a man who exposed more war crimes than any other individual." This took place in October 2021 at the eanad Éireann debate -Tuesday, 19 Oct 2021, Vol. 279 No. 7

https://www.facebook.com/tara.cummins.7712/videos/4573581339413692

DEPUTY FRANKIE FEIGAN: "The Minister [Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Defence, Deputy Coveney] considers this to be a legal matter within the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom that appears to be subject to ongoing legal proceedings. The question of the next steps for Mr. Assange rests with the UK judicial authorities. As legal proceedings are under way on this matter in another jurisdiction, the Minister does not intend to comment on this case."

SENATOR PAUL GAVAN: "It is so disappointing. We have a seat on the UN Security Council yet the Minister of State says the Government will not comment on perhaps the biggest human rights case facing the western world. What a contrast with the situation in Belarus. That is a situation involving a legal case.

That is a legal matter and the Government has no problem commenting on it. It has no problem commenting on legal proceedings in Russia but it will not offer a word of condemnation or stand for human rights when it comes to a man who has done more to expose war crimes than any other individual in my lifetime. The Minister of State is here to say there is nothing to see here and he will not comment.

Where are the values of this Government? How can this be acceptable in the face of the horrendous plight of Mr. Julian Assange? We all know why this is happening. The US wants to send a message to the world that if anybody tells the world what it does, this is the treatment that will be meted out. This is the punishment that will be received. We can see that happening to Julian but the Minister of State is here saying he has no comment. It is appalling."

Thank you to all Pakistanis for their amazing outpouring of support & emotions to protest against US-backed regime change abetted by local Mir Jafars to bring into power a coterie of pliable crooks all out on bail. Shows Pakistanis at home & abroad have emphatically rejected this

— Imran Khan (@ImranKhanPTI) April 10, 2022

Never have such crowds come out so spontaneously and in such numbers in our history, rejecting the imported govt led by crooks. pic.twitter.com/YWrvD1u8MM

— Imran Khan (@ImranKhanPTI) April 10, 2022

A debate on claims that Russian soldiers murdered hundreds of Ukrainian civilians can be found on Iran's PressTV at War Crimes Accusations in Ukraine (6/4/2/22). Unfortunately, I was unable to embed that video here, so visitors will have to follow the link in order to view the debate.

In that debate, Ian Williams, who professes to have been opposed to the numerous past wars by the United States, nevertheless argues, that the US is right to oppose what he claims is Russian aggression against Ukraine.

Tony Gosling argued that, given that Ukrainian President Zelensky has allowed the United States' effective control of Ukraine to continue, thereby threatening the very existence of Russia, Russia was left with no choice but to launch its Special Military Operation against his regime on 4 February.

Zelensky's continuation of the war against the Russian speakers in the Donbass and his efforts to make Ukraine even more closely aligned with the US through NATO membership were contrary to his 2019 presidential election promise to bring peace to Ukraine.

The previous Ukrainian President Poroshenko also promised, in his 2014 election campaign, to bring peace to Ukraine, but, instead, continued with the war against the Donbass and also became a puppet of the US.

In my opinion, Tony Gosling convincingly won the debate.

The mp4 file can be found at https://preview.presstv.ir/ptv///program/20220406/Spotlight06042022.mp4.

From The Bucha Provocation(4/4/2022) | Moon of Alabama :

The former Indian ambassador M.K. Bhadrakumar calls it an outright fake:

An indignant Moscow has angrily demanded a United Nations Security Council meeting on Monday over the allegations of atrocities by Russian troops in areas around Kiev through the past month. Prima facie, this allegation is fake news but it can mould misperceptions by the time it gets exposed as disinformation.

A Tass report says: “The Russian Defense Ministry said on Sunday that the Russian Armed Forces had left Bucha, located in the Kiev region, on March 30, while “the evidence of crimes” emerged only four days later, after Ukrainian Security Service officers had arrived in the town. The ministry stressed that on March 31, the town’s Mayor Anatoly Fedoruk had confirmed in a video address that there were no Russian troops in Bucha. However, he did not say a word about civilians shot dead on the street with their hands tied behind their backs.”

Even more surprising is that within minutes of the “breaking news”, western leaders — heads of state, foreign ministers, former politicians — popped up with statements duly kept ready and only based on the videos, seconds-long videos and a clutch of photos, ready to pour accusations. No expert opinion was sought, no forensic work was done, no opportunity given to the accused to be heard.

Okay, I will take you on your word and see what happens. Is this what you mean by your argument?  "NATO poses no threat to Putin's Russia because Russia has nuclear weapons. Until relatively recently, NATO countries like France were even selling weapons to Putin."

Zelensky was talking about stocking up on nuclear weapons, and that seemed to be the immediate provocation for Russia's special operation (invasion). Russia would not be able to intercept medium range nuclear weapons targeted against it, because the distance between Russia and Ukraine is too short.  If Ukraine were to deploy such medium range nuclear weapons, that would also give the United States a chance at a first strike on Russia.   So Russia had no defence except to invade Ukraine and destroy all of Ukraine's military arsenals and infrastructure, which is what President Putin announced was intended by Russia's Special Operation. 

The threat to Russia from Ukraine has been political and economic, with a US coup against a pro-Russia government, accompanied by US backing of civil war against the pro-Russian populations of Donbass. The US has been pumping weapons into Ukraine and helping train its militia. Until the US coup removed the pro-Russian president, there was not much trouble in that region. Ongoing for years have been the United States attempts to prevent Russia from supplying gas to Europe via Nordstream 2.  The United States finally succeeded in getting Germany to suspend its agreement with Russia for the pipeline (which Germany had originally asked to be built) when it drew the whole of the EU into war against Russia. That is largely what the war is about. It is a trade and currency war (since USD petrol currency is crucial for US international dominance).

Obviously a lot of other trade considerations are affected, but I won't complicate my answer with those. Except to say that US-NATO's efforts to destroy the Russian economy seem more likely to destroy US-NATO allies' economies.  Somehow US-NATO forgot about China, India, etc, plus all the other countries that have suffered through US-NATO invasions and economic interference.

As for France and other NATO countries selling weapons to Russia, it defies common sense and safety, but it probably doesn't defy commercial sense. 

Dear Mr Stoll (for that is the name you go by in another forum).

Your comments are instructive in the art of pro-war trolling, providing, as they do, a classic example of war-propaganda.  They aim to stigmatise me and my work and cause others to avoid association with me, not through reason, but purely via abuse.  Given that I am only a tiny player on the internet sphere, I take this as an indication of the overkill that US-NATO feels it needs to engage in so as to combat any opinions contrary to its propaganda, even when it has managed to censor most branded and government news and analysis sites, so as to prevent Australians from hearing anything from the other side in the Ukraine war, for fear that people then might call a halt to the continuous US-NATO hostile intervention along Russia's borders.

Steve M,

You aware of how many people the United States has killed just since 1990, let alone since 1945, aren't you?

Many hundreds of thousands, possibly over one million Iraq alone. Hundreds of thousands killed in Syria and Yemen. At least many tens of thousands killed in each of Libya, Afghanistan, Ethiopia and Somalia. The numbers of dead in each one of these conflicts is at least one order of magnitude larger than the 1,151 civilians that may have been killed in Russia's Special Military Operation against the United States' puppet Ukrainian regime of Volodymyr Zelensky which was launched on 24 February.

And what about the many millions killed by the United States in each of the Korean and Vietnam wars?

And yet, the government of Ukraine, supposedly representing the will of all Ukrainians, wanted to form a military alliance with such a country through NATO!

How could Russia not have seen this as a threat to its own existence?

I consider the omission of the above context in our 'news' media narrative about the Ukraine-Russia conflict to be censorship. Don't you?

And what about the removal of Oliver Stone's "Ukraine on Fire" from YouTube?

The war in Ukraine, in fact started in November 2013, when the United States paid Ukrainian vassals from US Secretary of State Victoria Nuland's $7 billion war chest to stage violent protests against the democratically elected government of President Victor Yanukovych. After Yanukovych was forced to flee for his life, Russian speakers in Crimea, without firing a shot, voted overwhelmingly in a referendum to secede from Ukraine and rejoin Russia.

Ukrainians in the eastern Russian-speaking provinces of Lugansk and Donetsk peacefully protested against the regime and were met with tanks and bullets. They organised self-defence forces to resist the new regime. The conflict in that region has cost over 14,000 lives so far. Much housing and infrastructure of those regions has been destroyed by the Ukrainian regime's neo-nazi Azov battalion footsoldiers.

Even according to Wikipedia the civilian death toll since 24 February, presumably not including from Lugansk and Donetsk and Lugansk, is 1,151 civilian deaths and 1,824 wounded confirmed.

The number of civilians killed in each conflict started by the US well exceeds what Russia is alleged to have killed in Ukraine so far. In each of those many conflicts initiated by the US, the numbers killed by the US exceeds the numbers killed by Russia since 24 February by at least an order of magnitude.

None of this is mentioned in any of Australia's government and commercial 'news' reports on Ukraine. How is this not censorship?

How about properly informing yourself about the facts of the Russia/Ukraine conflict before you make further posts to candobetter?

And why do you consider it necessary to smear the editor of candobetter?

In fact, the example below, relates to a Chinese government official, Zhang Meifang who has been labeled a '"China Government Official' by Twitter. Twitter has apparently presumed that many of its users are too stupid to be able to work out for themselves that Zhang Meifang is an official of the Chinese Government.

RT and RT video programs like CrossTalk, Going Underground and Worlds Apart were funded by the Russian government. Newsmedia funded by the British State such as the BBC is not similarly labeled, nor is the US government funded National Public Radio (NPR) labeled thus.

A more likely motive for tweets from those working for Russian or Chinese government media organisations being so labeled is to imply that that those making those tweets must be doing so for nefarious purposes and that those who follow those accounts and even retweet those tweets, knowing that they are produced by people working for those overseas governments, must also be doing so for nefarious purposes.

In my experience, Tweets labeled "Russia state-affiliated media" & "China government Official" r quite informative & insightful. Had there been more such tweets back in 2011, the destruction of Libya & hundreds of thousands of #Syria|n, Iraqi & Yemeni lives might have been saved https://t.co/7RemKITrZu

— Malthusista (@malthusista) March 20, 2022

? Ukrainian civilians in Kharkov, 2nd largest city in Ukraine when asked about taking arms against Russia: “No. I wouldn’t. None of the people I know would. No one of the civilian population of Ukraine would fight with the Russian brothers.”

pic.twitter.com/lRwWhBBWGa

— ASB News / MILITARY〽️ (@ASBMilitary) January 28, 2022

On 24 November 2021, three months ago Sputnik News reported Almost 70% of Ukrainians Believe Zelensky Should Not Run for New Term, Poll Shows.

Almost 70% of Ukrainians believe that incumbent President Volodymyr Zelensky should not run for a second term over failure to fulfill election promises, according to a survey published by the Razumkov Center on Friday.

…

Nearly half of all those polled, or 42.5%, expressed the opinion that the president's Servant of the People party is worse than the "old" parties, 33% said that it did not differ significantly from them, and only 14% of citizens were sure that the party was indeed the "party of new people that makes positive changes in the society."

…

20-12-2021

The following letter was sent to Ministers Richard Wynne (Planning) , d'Ambrosio (Environment) and  Shaun Leane (Local Government and Suburban Development ) by Protectors of Public Lands Inc. 

Dear Minister,

I write on behalf of Protectors of Public Lands to ask you to intervene in the current destruction of an area of Fawkner Park by Melbourne City Council.  The works are termed "improvements" to the Pasley Street entrance to Fawkner Park, but in our opinion they are a degradation of this Victorian Heritage Registered park. 

Unfortunately, trees have already been felled for the purpose of laying down a multi- purpose games court and skating area. Concreting of the area is scheduled for Monday 20th December 2021. PPL Vic. Inc. is asking you to intervene urgently to stop the works now so that restoration of the park can start as soon as possible.

There was very inadequate public consultation for these works, and they are being carried out in the absence of a current Master Plan. The Master Plan of 2006 gave no inkling of the dramatic changes that are now proposed.  The Master Plan was meant to be reviewed in 2016, and would have involved considerable consultation. In November 2017, only a very small, select number of opinions were sought about this current plan. This current development is also at odds with the current espoused strategy of MCC of enhancing nature and connectivity to increase biodiversity.

Why the lack of consultation? This seems to be part of the trademark of many governments. Who really has a vested interest in this development? Who gains most? Why the push to do this so quickly?

PPL Vic. Inc. supported the decision of Heritage Victoria to deny the City of Melbourne a Permit for the works proposed for Fawkner Park on Heritage grounds. This decision was appealed at great expense by City of Melbourne, its lawyers and the Heritage Council and the decision was overruled in favour of this development.

Furthermore, PPL Vic. Inc. is of the opinion that the MCC has ignored the changed needs of the community at large in light of the pandemic of 2020 to 2021 (and probably beyond) when green areas have been shown to be invaluable to the people of Melbourne.

In this era of acknowledged climate change, these works will destroy the shade and cool of the lawns and trees, make the area impermeable to rainwater, and in total will be a local environmental negative.

This development is extremely ill considered and should not go ahead until there is a new Master Plan and appropriate consultation.

Yours sincerely,

Fiona Bell, President.

Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc (PPLVic.Inc)

   Phone 0425 707637

The imprisonment and torture of Julian Assange by Britain is clearly illegal under international law as well as British law. Had the Australian government told the British government to release Julian Assange at any point in time over the last nine and a half years, the British government would have been left with no choice but to comply. If they had not, Australia would have had recourse to the International Criminal Court and to the United Nations and with international public opinion overwhelmingly on julian Assange's side, Britain would have quickly found it had no legs to stand on and left with no choice but to free Julian Assange without delay.

However, recently leaked documents show that the Australlian government has not only failed in this basic duty of care towards Julian Assange, but it has actually worked with the Swedish, British and United States governments against Julian Assange behind our backs.

Had George Christensen's motion been seconded, then debated and voted upon, many of the facts about Britain's and Sweden's monstrous treatment of Julian Assange since 16 June 2021 would have been revealed to all Australians on the floor of our Parliament [1] regardless of whether or not there was sufficient support for Julian Assange there to carry the vote.

The profile of the campaign to free Julian Assange would have been greatly lifted here, in Australia, and elsewhere.

Footnote[s]

[1] Given the astonishing refusal by all 14 other members of the Julian Assange Support Group to second George Christensen's motion, I no longer feel as assured as I previously had that, had the bill been debated that those 14 members would have used their voices, as effectively as they could have, for Julian Assange.

I was unable to email the email below to my local member, Peta Murphy as her Connect page contains no email address. - James

Dear Peta Murphy, As my elected member for the Federal electorate of Dunkley, I am writing to request, as a matter of urgency, that when George Christensen puts his "Illegal Detention of Australian Journalists (Free Julian Assange) Bill 2021" [1] that you cast your vote for this bill. Julian Assange is the most famous and most revered Australian anywhere in the world for his establishment of the Wikileaks news service. His treatment for the last nine years and, in particular, the last two and a half years, where he has had to endure solitary confinement for 23 hours per day and has suffered a tooth abscess and other ailments from medical neglect in Belmarsh Prison, is monstrous. George Christensen's bill rightly calls for this treatment of Julian Assange, or any other journalist, by any person in the world, including individual members of governments to be defined as a crime. The punishment for that crime would be by 7 years in prison. This means that any person, including any government leader or government minister, who has, in any way, facilitated the imprisonment and torture treatment of Julian Assange, for the last nine and a half years, be arrested and tried should they ever land on Australian soil. I ask you to vote for George Christen's motion when it is put to the House of Representatives. Yours faithfully, James Sinnamon FOOTNOTE[S] [1] See https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Fbills%2Fr6822_first-reps%2F0000%22;rec=0 and https://candobetter.net/james-sinnamon/blog/6201/george-christensen-put-parliament-bill-make-australian-government-act-free

From

Former CIA officer and whistleblower John Kiriakou joins Shadowproof managing editor Kevin Gosztola to discuss a major report from Yahoo! News on CIA director Mike Pompeo and the agency's plans to destroy WikiLeaks and kidnap or kill WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

The above video was posted on the Shadowproof YouTube channel. The title of this comment is taken from the words of John Kiriakou in this interview, as posted to Twitter: "There is no reason why this case should still be going."