 Let me just do a little adjustment here. Hopefully that's not too loud. We should be live right now. Hi everyone, welcome to my channel and welcome to another live stream. Today we're talking about Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, our open discussion, and this is part 10. We've done a few of these over the last couple of years, two or three years, and we've created some additional content regarding Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. So we're continuing this discussion to see where it leads us, and this is day two of two. And what we did yesterday was basically we read a couple of articles and we watched, I believe, a couple of videos, interviews and discussions regarding Julian Assange's case. And today we're going to do the same thing. We're going to read an article. There's a couple of three videos that got lined up actually. So I have more videos lined up than articles. Well, I do have articles lined up, but I like to go through one article, short article, and then there's like three videos that we can watch. I'm going to ask chat which one they prefer to watch or if all of them. And then there's a couple of very long articles I've got queued up to read. I'm not sure if we're going to get to those, but we'll talk about it once people start rolling in once notifications go out. And yesterday, I know the Twitch notifications didn't go out right away. The Discord notifications went out, but the Twitch notifications didn't go out. So until notifications go out, I'm just going to give you guys a little intro as to what this is about. I am on Patreon. Patreon.com forward slash Chico, C-H-Y-C-H-O. If you want to support this work, Patreon is a fantastic way to do so. If you want to follow this work, Patreon is a fantastic way to do so. You can follow the work. I don't put anything behind paywalls. Everything is creative commons. Share and share a like. And if you like what you see after a while, and if you think this work deserves support, your support through funds, then Patreon is a fantastic way to do that. We are live streaming on Twitch.tv forward slash Chico live, C-H-Y-C-H-O-L-I-V-E. Okay. If you want to participate in the chat, that's happening down there. And you're going to see it here. Cheryl, good morning. How are you doing? Twitch is where you want to be at. For the mods that have been taking care of business here for a number of years, for at least three years now, thank you very much for the support. For those of you who've been coming onto the live streams to participate in these discussions, thank you very much for being here. Thank you for the subs. Thank you for the follows. Thank you for the cheers. Okay. Lonely Piggy. How are you doing? Chico and chat. Hope all is well. Another important stream today. Another important stream today, Lonely Piggy. And today, by the way, is November. I think I mentioned that I might not have. November 3rd, 2020, right? It's US election day. So there's a reason why I scheduled two Julian Assange streams for November 2nd or November 3rd, because in my opinion, what happens to Julian Assange is a lot more important than what happens in the US elections right now. Julian Assange fate. Our fate is tied to Julian Assange. What happens to Julian Assange will decide how Western civilization will function for a number of decades to come. What happens in the United States is a hiccup. And we've talked about this. Wingnut. How are you doing? 1010. Hello, Chico. Hello, Tyson. Terror7. How are you doing? Welcome. Welcome. Twitching Jason. Good morning all. Fun day ahead here in the US. Hope everyone is well. Hope everyone is well gang. Fun indeed. And it's not gonna, anything's, nothing's gonna be decided today. We'll see where everything goes, right? Pladden's rule. How are you doing? Good day to you from Finland. Good day Finland. How are you doing? Salutations from the west coast of Canada. Hope you're doing well. Thorn. Hello, hello, hello everybody. From Waterloo. Waterloo. I've been to Waterloo. I lived in Waterloo for five plus years. What a fantastic fantastic, Waterloo, Ontario anyway, Canada. I know there's a Waterloo in the UK as well. But I enjoyed Waterloo very much. The facet. Evening all finally caught one. Facet, welcome, welcome. Lonely piggy. Got our first snow in Montreal overnight. Any over in the west coast should know. Nothing here right now. We've been getting a lot of rain. Which is Vancouver or west coast of Canada, Pacific Northwest, temperate rainforest. That's our winter for the most part. Lots of rain. Overcast. And it is beautiful. It is beautiful. It gets to some. For me, I love it. I do love it. I love the sun, but I love it. Manchester, UK. Good morning and good evening Manchester, UK. Cheryl, jealous. Oh Cheryl, you want the snow to come in. Gina, how are you doing? Hi, it's Chichon Chat. Welcome, welcome everyone. Touching the man, I miss Montreal. Probably one of the first places I'll visit once it's safe. Yeah, Montreal is beautiful. I agree. Montreal is a fantastic city. Fantastic city. Amazing food, amazing people, amazing culture. Super fun. Amazing nightlife. Amazing nightlife. I do announce these live streams 30 minutes before we go live on L.O.M.I.'s V.K. Part of the Gap and Twitter. You can follow the work there. Carlos, how are you doing? Good morning, Chichon. Glad to be here. Happy to be here. Woke up with a more positive mindset than I usually do. It's election day in the US. I'm in California. Everyone's losing it. I bet. It's the final episode, right? Until the next season kicks in. So the production value of this charade is incredible, incredible. Gina, soft rain always helps me reach that wonderful liminar state. Yeah, it's beautiful. It's beautiful. I don't know. It was raining harder this morning. I was hoping the hard rain would maintain that way you could hear it. But it calmed down a little bit. Paladin's rule. We had our first snow a week ago, and now it's been just raining all stop. Paladin, you're in Finland, you said? Where are you from? Finland, yeah. You guys have very much the same climate as we do in Canada, on the West Coast anyway, I believe. Only 1455 days until the next one. Not really, because you have the Senate and stuff in two years, right? So you have this, and then two years you got that stuff, and then you got another one, and then you got another one. So every two-year cycle, and the election cycle's never over, so they start pumping money into it a year before any election, at least. So it's a constant election cycle. Gotta keep the people entertained. The final episode exactly, Chicho. I call it a novella, which is just Spanish for soap opera. It is health and health and wealth to everyone. Health and wealth to everyone. The end is nigh. Tyson? Not even. It's just beginning. It's just beginning. This is kicking into the next phase of what is coming. For live streams where we don't have any visuals, when we do open discussion, we do upload the audios to SoundCloud.com forward slash Chicho, C-H-Y-C-H-O as podcasts. And for these two live streams that we have right now, I will try to upload the streams to the audio to SoundCloud. I'll have to extract it out of the video, because we will be watching video, and the mic won't pick it up, so it has to be extracted from the live streams. So I'll try my best to do that. And these podcasts should be available on your favorite podcasting platform, including Spotify and iTunes. And we will be uploading this video to both this live stream, to both Bichute and YouTube. Okay. Julian Assange Streams are one of the topics that I've chosen to discuss in the content that I'm creating, along with mathematics, comic books, food, politics, economics, entheogens, and whatnot. Julian Assange Streams is one that I will not censor off YouTube personal censor, so we will continue to share that information on YouTube. And if we will be heard by it, there's no doubt, since we started covering Julian Assange and the trial and started doing readings of WikiLeaks files, to a certain degree, well, large part, we've been demoted on YouTube. So we don't get recommended as often, and there's certain shenanigans taking place. So be it. Okay. If the censors seriously kick in, and they decide to censor any channels that have shared information from WikiLeaks, because we've done the Waltz 7 readings, we've done the Guantanamo Pay files, and we've done the OPCW leaks, right? If they decide at some point, which that's the direction they're going, that anyone that has shared any type of information like that, those channels will be videos will be deleted, or channels will be deleted, or whatever it is. If we get the platform off YouTube, remember gang, we are on Bichute, and you can find us there. Okay. VC, how are you doing? Hey, Chico, how are you doing? Well, doing well. Kebabs, greetings, greetings. Hope you guys are doing well. Gang, let's start talking about Julian Assange. Now, here's the thing, right? Let me show you what I got lined up for us to cover. And you guys tell me how you guys want to approach this. Okay. Now, I'm going to read an article on concern of news by Pepe Escobar. It's a short article. It's called, Julian Assange, Prometheus Bound. Okay. It's just a sort of a poetic little piece that Pepe Escobar wrote comparing Julian Assange to Prometheus, and sort of Greek mythology and stuff like this. I'm going to brutalize the Greek names, but it is what it is. So, or the names period. So I do want to read this article. And then I have two videos that we can look at. One of them is the first John Pilger interview with Julian Assange. Okay. First John Pilger interview with Julian Assange, and it's an hour and eight minutes long. So, and it's an important interview. It occurred in 2010, 10 years ago. I believe this occurred right after the Iraq war logs, which is the reason that the US government is trying to extradite Julian Assange to the United States. Contrary to what people believe, it's not because of the Clinton email leaks from 2016 that got all the, I can't say the word, really pissed off at WikiLeaks and Julian Assange because they believed they blamed WikiLeaks and Julian Assange for getting Trump into power, which was the most ridiculous thing that just children really thrown a tamper tantrum. So all those liberal channels, people started throwing a lot of hate in Julian Assange's way. Okay. So they began the cascade of this central power to a certain degree in the eyes of the populace being justified to go after Julian Assange. But it is because of the Iraq war logs that the US government is trying to extradite him out in the United States. So this occurred, I believe, right after Iraq war logs. Okay. And as you can tell, this is a younger Julian Assange. And this is hour and eight minutes. So let me know if you guys want to watch this. It's very chill. Very chill. It's very ASMR if you want to have a nice low, key, calm morning or evening. And then there is a 2016 interview of John Pilger with Julian Assange. And you can tell in six years, Julian Assange has aged a lot. Right. So we can watch this. And this one's only 24 minutes or we can watch this right after the next one. Okay. Null. Ron. Ron Al Scott. It's election day. I'm a little worried about how the US is going to be after today. That is the key. Riots may be maybe crazy. It most likely possibly. And from certain reports coming in, there's a lot of bricks being laid. Or let me rephrase, there's a lot of bricks being dropped off in certain key locations around the United States without any construction in sight. Emily. Hello. Envious. How are you doing? Good evening from Germany. Everyone. Good evening. Envious. Hope you're doing well. So we can watch this one as well. And I've watched, I've read and watched all of these except one of the articles that I want to show you. So we can watch this as well. And this is important as well. Then there's a very long article by Patrick Lawrence. Okay. The revelations of WikiLeaks number nine, opening CIA's vault. And this Patrick Lawrence has written a tremendous amount of articles on Julian Assange, on politics, on economics, on everything. And if you haven't read any of his work, I highly recommend reading his work. And what I'm going to do, I'm going to link up these articles. So those of you in articles and videos, those of you in chat that want to sort of bookmark these, please let me know. Bricks equals pallets. That sounds scary. Must be the leftover brick from the walnut blew over. Gina. Whoa, bricks. I'm interested in reading more about that. It's just stuff that I've come across. And there were, in a weird way, bricks being laid in a lot of other certain other times as well. In the last few months. Here's the other interview. Here's the Patrick Lawrence article. Well worth to read. Heavy read. Lots of info. Like really tremendous amount, lots of names, lots of connections. Thank you for sharing the links. My pleasure. Envious. Here's another interview by Kevin Costala Costanza with interview with Major Marjorie Cohen on the 10th anniversary of WikiLeaks publishing Iraq war logs, which is basically related to this interview. So maybe we can flip into this interview. Okay. Because it goes into the 10th anniversary of what the Iraq war logs revealed for us, right? So that might be a good combo. So that'd be like an hour and a half of just watching interviews, right? Which I'm okay with. Sorry, I failed in my memory mission. Oh, God, no worries, brother. Funny, funny. And here's an article of Julian Assange titled Julian Assange faces the trial of the century. 10 reasons why it threatens freedom with speech from the Grey Zone by Fidel Narvez and Ben Norton. And I've read halfway through this now. I haven't gone through the whole thing. It's well worth reading. At some point, you know, I'm going to read it, but there's so much information to go through, right? And it's a great, and here's another interview. And here's an interview with John Pilger regarding Julian Assange's trial. And it's sort of the up to date information regarding what have, what's going on with Julian Assange. And we read an article by Julian Assange, by John Pilger regarding the trials, right? Twitching Jason, if we're picking, picking up for most chill one up to you guys though. Okay. Yeah, you guys, you guys decide, the most chill one is this one. It's an hour and eight, one hour and eight minutes of John Pilger talking to Julian Assange. And this is when WikiLeaks and Julian Assange really hit the international radar with the Iraq war logs and the collateral murder video and all this, right? Extremely important because, and I, my vote is on this as well, to be true, because Julian Assange has been dehumanized, right? That's what the corporate propagandists and centralized power and the police forces and the mainstream news networks have been doing. They've been dehumanizing Julian Assange and this humanizes him. Very important, right? Now, just to give you a perspective on what this is about, okay? What's happening with Julian Assange is a short trial. It is, it is, as far as I'm concerned, the greatest short trial of the century that as Pepe Eskibar or someone else has written, it would make Nazi Germany, Stalin and any dictatorial power envious of the way it's being conducted, right? They didn't even have the balls to conduct the short trial on this level, okay? And that's happening in the UK, right? And one of the authors, as you know, I, I like and I read and I've read a lot of his articles and I've listened to a lot of his interviews and stuff like this is Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Anton Wilson wrote a punk metal, cyberpunk metal play, musical play regarding the trial of Wilhelm Reich and it's called Wilhelm Reich and Hell. It's this book here, okay? Now, you're not gonna see it well enough on this thing. I'm just gonna bring it closer and make sure it's, so Wilhelm Reich and Hell, this is an important book as far as I'm concerned. It's not bad. I've taken some notes in this, right? Let me read you the synopsis of this on Amazon, okay? And this is, and I don't recommend buying off Amazon, I'm just showing you this because it has a good synopsis and it's gonna quote from Wilhelm Reich, okay? So the description for this book, if you want to, you know, know what this book is about, Wilhelm Reich and Hell, okay? Quote, the great psychiatrist Wilhelm Reich once wrote, quote, no president, academy, court of law, congress or senate on this earth has the knowledge or power to decide what will be knowledge, what will be the knowledge of tomorrow, end quote. In 1957, the government of the United States of America jailed Dr. Wil, Dr. Reich and burned all of his published works. Wilhelm Reich and Hell provides a remarkable new look at the vilification and destruction of a great man who refused to bow to Gestapo tactics. And if you know the history of Wilhelm Reich and what this is all about, and he's the Wilhelm Reich is the person that in our book club we've talked about and we've read certain parts of the mass psychology of fascism, he wrote about fascism, he lived through fascism, okay? And this is basically sort of a cyberpunk musical of a show trial that Robert Anton Wilson wrote regarding Wilhelm Reich, okay? And believe it or not, this Wilhelm Reich and Hell already has a musical as well. And I'm going to rate this as a 10 because I've seen this a couple of times, okay? And it's a musical that has been, has seen, you know, I don't know if it's been played on Broadway, but it has been, it's a musical that had been performed live. And there's a movie on this, Wilhelm Reich and Hell. And I tried to find this and I couldn't find it online for some reason, but I'll give you the description of this as well, okay? The summary of Wilhelm Reich and Hell, which is this book here turned into a musical movie, right? It's just very much on the same level as the Rocky Horror Picture Show, but not as famous, unfortunately, right? And here's the description for this. I'm just going to pop on the chat just so I'm not missing anything. Quote, law and order on acid and in Hell, only Robert Anton Wilson could conjure courtroom punk rock drama, blending Marilyn Monroe, the Marquina side, Gorgiev, the American Medical Association, aka the world's greatest rock band and the horror of the condition of planet Earth. Dr. Wilhelm Reich, infamous Austrian-American psychoanalyst and researcher whose books were burned by Hitler, Stalin and the US government, finds himself again accused of thought crime, offered a final attempt to free mankind from his emotional plague. Reich leads his own defense amid the surreal and frightening spectacle of sex, violence, liberty and fascism. Links on screen, hide a bit of content showing. Okay, hold on, let me do this. Let me give you guys the link to these things as well. Oh yeah, here's John Pilger's own page where he has Wilhelm Reich's, not Wilhelm Reich, his first interview on there. Lavra, Lavra, Me Too. Okay, here's the book on Amazon if you want to know what it is. Again, I recommend buying it locally instead of Amazon. And here's the, you know, I'll give you the IMDB page for Wilhelm Reich in hell. That way you guys have all the links that you need. So again, let's read this article first. And what was the comment? Lonely Piggy, links on screen, hide a bit of the content content shown. Links on screen. So we're talking about the top. I got black bars up top because it's black bars up top in the bottom because, oh, these guys, oh my god, I forgot to take these down. Thank you Lonely Piggy, my bad, that was ridiculous. Thanks, appreciate it. And what I'm going to do is I'm going to turn off chat as well. Thanks Lonely Piggy, I should have known that silly me. Amazon, remember Evil Eye, indeed, indeed. The Patreon Twitch, oh, thanks Cheryl. I didn't have my OBS on. Like what you're seeing on screen is me seeing this. So I was seeing my whole thing with crap. Your social media, thank you Gina. And thank you Lonely, thanks guys. I think he means the Patreon Twitch, yeah, unfortunately I left that on. I'm going to turn off chat so the chat doesn't pop off on the screen because we're going to have the chat running on the side. And again, my apologies for those links. I got to have a little notes with me, remove links and whatnot. So I'm going to take the chat off so it doesn't pop on the screen anymore. And what I'm going to do is let's read Pepe Escobar's, no problem. Yeah, well it bugs me, I'm sort of perfectionist, perfectionist try to be anyway regarding certain things. And by the way, as far as my snack school, you might see me eating once we start watching the video. I got some walnuts here. And over here we got sunflower butter, sunflower seed butter and honey mixed together. So sort of sweet. Fall is, for me, is power food season. Okay, so again, let's read Pepe Escobar's article, little piece, and then if there's anyone that wants to talk about something, we'll pause a little bit, and then we're going to watch the hour plus interview of John Pilger and Julian Assange. And I'm going to keep the chat up on the side here. So, oh, I made a chichu inspired yoga poll this morning. Nice. Also, I hope you had a great breakfast, Tuching Jason, Chicho, you need a B5 list protocol. I do indeed, I do indeed. And Aligot, just so you know, I had a list when I first started streaming on Twitch. I had a list of things I had to do before a live stream. And I kept some of those things. And I was at some point, I was going to do a live stream video on how to do a live stream video or how I went about it. Oh, yeah, you remember, that's right. That's right, I did share it. Gang, let's read this article. Pepe Escobar, Julian Assange, Prometheus Bound. I look down, I look down a lot. Yeah. So let's read this quick article. Pepe Escobar, Julian Assange, Prometheus Bound. He's being punished not for stealing fire, but for exposing power under the light of truth and provoking the God of exceptionalism. And just so you guys know, before we get into this, it's short, but it references a lot of Greek mythology. And when I was reading this article, I had to look up who all these people were, right? And Prometheus is deity, God, Greek mythology, where he brought fire to human beings and provided knowledge and stuff, and the gods persecuted him, right? And then he references other people that had to, or other gods and deities. So I had to look up who some of those people were. And it's pretty nice information if you want to learn about some of the references being made. He is being punished not for stealing fire, but for exposing power under the light of truth and provoking the God of exceptionalism. And this picture is police ejecting Julian Assange from Ecuador and Embassy in London, April 11th, 2019 by Pepe Escobar, special to Consortium News. This is a tale of an ancient Greek tragedy reenacted in Anglo-America. Amid thundering silence and nearly universal indifference, chained immobile, invisible, a squalid Prometheus was transferred from the gallows for a show trial and a f***s gothic court built on the site of a medieval prison. Kratos, impersonating strength and by impersonating violence, had duly chained Prometheus not to a mountain in the Caucasus, but to solitary confinement in a high security prison subject to relentless psychological torture. All along the western watchtowers, no Hephaestus volunteered to forge in his smithy a degree of reluctance or even a sliver of pity. Prometheus is being punished not for stealing fire, but for exposing power under the light of truth, thus provoking the unbound ire of Zeus, the exceptionalist, who is only able to stage his crimes under multiple veils of secrecy. Prometheus pierced the myth of secrecy, which envelops Zeus's ability to control the human spectrum, and that is anathema. Prometheus being chained by Vulcan, 1623 oil painting by Dirk von Babron. We continue. For years, debased, hacked stereographers worked relentlessly to depict Prometheus as a lowly trickster and inconsequential forger. Abandoned, smeared, demonized, Prometheus was comforted by only a small chorus of Oceans. Craig Murray, John Pilger, Daniel Esberg, WikiLeak warriors, consortium writers. Prometheus was denied even the basic tools to organize a defense that might at least rattle Zeus's cognitive dissident narrative. Oceanus, the titan father of the Oceans, could not possibly urge Prometheus to appease Zeus. Fleetingly, Prometheus might have revealed to the chorus that exposing secrecy was not what best suited his heart's content. His play might also, in the long run, revive popular attachment to the civilizing arts. One day, Prometheus was visited by Io, a human maiden. He may have forecasted she would engage in no future travels and she would bear him two offsprings, and he may have foreseen that one of their descendants, an unnamed epigen of Hercules, many generations hence would release him figuratively from his torment. Zeus and his prosecutorial minions don't have much of a case against Prometheus, apart from possession and dissemination of classified exceptional information. Still, it was eventually up to Hermes, the messenger of gods, and significantly the conduit of news to be sent down by Zeus in uncontrollable anger to demand that Prometheus admits he was guilty of trying to overthrow the rulers based order established by the supreme exceptional. This is what's being ritualized at the current show trial, which was never about justice. Prometheus won't be tamed. In his mind, he will be reliving tenisensioles, to retrieve, to seek, to find, and not to yield. So Zeus will finally strike him with the thunderbolt of exceptionalism, and Prometheus will be hurled into the abyss. Prometheus' theft of the secrecy of power, though, is irreversible. His fate will certainly prompt the late entrance of Pandora and her jar of evils, complete with unforeseen consequences. Whatever the verdict reached in that 17th century court, it's far from certain that Prometheus will enter history just as a mere object of blame for human folly, because now the heart of the matter is that the mask of Zeus has fallen. Really, I think this is an exceptionally powerful piece, and most people who don't understand what is happening to Julian Assange and what WikiLeaks is about him, what centralized power is doing. This will go over their heads as if, like, whatever analogy you want to use, right? Most people will read this and go, what is Pepe Escobar talking about? And if you follow the Julian Assange case, you know what WikiLeaks was about. You know what this trial means to humanity, really. This piece is extremely powerful, extremely powerful. Holy God, I love the story, but not the real remake. Hello, Chico. Morning, even though I'm having lunch right now. Good morning, Lark Bark and good afternoon to you. Shite Hawk, any mention of the bit where Prometheus hit from a sexual assault and rape trial? There was no rape trial. There were no sexual assault charges. They were talking to him about it. Those, also, good evening, everyone, good evening. Yeah, there isn't, and all of those stuff coming from Sweden, it was just concocted. It was lies, right? On behalf of the US government, and Sweden, as far as I'm concerned, the Swedish government is on the same level as the UK government, just puppets of the United States in large part. Lark Bark, yeah. Sure, why not? It's never too early for lunch. I'm not so much of the breakfast guy. Oh, I love breakfast. I understand every word of that message. Elder God, I had to look up. By the way, I read Greek mythology before, but me and names don't get along, so I even had to look up Prometheus and read his write-up of Prometheus to get an appreciation of what this article is, and kudos to Pepe Eskabar for writing such a powerful piece, such a powerful piece. Gang, and let me give you the link again for those that might have popped in here later. And this is the piece that we read. I provided all these, and I'll have the links to everything in the description of the video once we upload this video to both Bitshoot and YouTube. And here's the link to this video. I had a classic education. I was very lucky. Oh, Elder God, you were seriously lucky. Zane, how are you doing? You were seriously lucky. Like, for me, all this stuff, I can't retain that information with the names and mythology, because I never got into them extremely deep, right? You're good. Doing good. Gang, should we watch this video? Unless there's anything anyone wants to talk about, Mick. Hey, Chicho, it's been a while off topic, but just want to thank you for the talk we had about cancer back in May, along with the video you posted on YouTube afterwards, too. My dad, sorry to hear that, man. My dad passed away peacefully four days ago. Ah, peacefully is a good thing. Four days ago, and truly your words helped a lot throughout that time. Bless you. Gang, let's watch the video. Elder God, this one, this video, I don't have the timestamps. I watched this video a couple of times. I re-watched it again yesterday, but I don't have the timestamps as to which parts to cut up. We could. Yeah, yeah, yeah, we could pause it for sure, Elder God. Yeah, you too, Mick. Be well. What we can do, chat. I'll play the video, and if anybody wants to talk about a specific segment, just post a comment in our chat, and I'll pause the video and we'll talk about it. Great idea, Elder God. Larkbark, I'm terribly sorry for your loss, Mick. I lost my mother and grandmother three years ago. We're here for you, indeed. So, gang, we're going to watch the video, and anybody, if you want, pause, just say chicho, and for sure, just put chicho, pause, and we can talk about it, okay? And if it's right in the middle of the sentence, I'll wait until either Julie Nassange or John Pilger has finished their sentence, and then we can talk about things. Great idea, Elder God. And if we're going to do this, the odds are we're going to spend the rest of the stream talking about this. Okay, gang, here comes the video, and let me know if the sound you want the sound to be higher. I got it maxed out there, and I haven't maxed out, I don't have it maxed out here. I'm putting it on 50, but let me know if the audio needs to be kicked up, okay, or kicked down. Okay, gang? You've described WikiLeaks as untraceable and uncensurable. What do you mean by that? Well, nothing in this world is guaranteed, for sure, but within that, we have put together an infrastructure using technical and legal techniques to really make it hard to trace people and make it hard to take down our material once it's published, and to date, we've had a hundred percent success rate. So that basic idea and intention is comprised of a number of specific ways of doing things. So for untraceability, this means people send us material in the post in a particular way, engaging in particular procedures, which makes it effectively impossible to trace, or it means they submit material to us online and bounce the information through dozens of computers around the world, each computer encrypting its transmissions before it connects to another computer. So in this way, discarding identities as the information flows around the world. As it flows through different countries, we make sure it flows through Sweden and Belgium, and these two countries have specific source protection laws. In Sweden, as part of the Swedish Constitution, the Press Freedom Act, and in Belgium, a specific law dealing with the communications protections between a source and a journalist using any means whatsoever, including electronic transmissions. For publication, this means housing our servers in many different jurisdictions, such that any sort of interim attack on us, interim injunction, is not going to take the information down entirely. It may knock it out here. It may knock it out there. But we can put up servers and gain support and respond legally fast enough such that the information is not going to be removed from the public, and that has been what has happened today. We have never lost the court case in any jurisdiction. Important thing to remember, but there have been interim attempts to injunct us, and while those interim attempts have gone on, we have managed to keep publishing. How many documents of real value have you been able to accept and publish? Well, it's hard to know how many real value this is in the eyes of the beholder. To us, all information that is true has value eventually. It may only be a very small value to someone somewhere, but getting that information into the historical record, padding out the historical record, provides a sort of richness to every other bit of information in the historical record. If you're talking about things which have clearly changed outcomes of elections or clearly introduced some law reform or clearly brought perpetrators to trial, then this is in the hundreds, somewhere in the hundreds, for the clearly changing governments or elections or having ministers depose, this is maybe half a dozen to ten, something like that. That's the power of information. It's an altruism, isn't it? And this is such a modern, ultra-modern form of getting it out. It must frighten a lot of establishments and authority and especially governments. What governments have been successful in blocking it, in blocking WikiLeaks? The governments that have clearly tried to interfere with readers' ability to look at what we publish and leakers' ability to give it stuff. China is the worst dependent. China has the most aggressive, sophisticated interception technology that places itself in between every reader inside China and every information source outside China. So we've been fighting a running battle to make sure our information can get through. So there's all sorts of ways that Chinese readers can read our site, but the first thing that they try doesn't work. The first thing you would imagine doing just go to WikiLeaks.org. That doesn't work, but variations on that do work. Iran has blocked us as well for a period, however we are now unblocked in Iran. The Australian government has added us to their list of secret internet sites that are to be blocked once a national filtering system is put into place. That national filtering system has not yet been put into place, but if it is, we'll be on the list. That's the only Western government, is it? There's also Germany has done a similar thing to Australia in a similar position where they're trying to get up this national censorship system. It looks like it's not going to pass constitutional review. It looks like it won't get up. But something important to understand is what happens in the West is privatized censorship. So like most other institutions in the West, censorship has been privatized and that means the big corporations go through the court system to get injunctions and use the coercive power of the state by the ability to deploy armed police to force a court order. They use the court apparatus to do that. I mean there's other ways censorship occurs in the West's economic pushes and so on. But to give a specific example, a private bank, it deals with wealthy private clients, minimum account balance of one million bucks, hides their assets around the world to make sure creditors, ex-wives, police, tax departments, I can't get them. We revealed their trust structures in the Cayman Islands, the beneficiaries who set up the trust, how much money was in it and so on. And they attacked us in the United States. In the courts? In the courts. So it's a Swiss Cayman operation using US federal law to try and attack us. They attacked the main registration URL that people are familiar with, WikiLeaks.org, because one of the companies involved in registering that was based in California and through that intermittent junction they did take that down for 10 days. Now of course we were still publishing on all our other URL, still publishing successfully out of Sweden, but the thing that people were most familiar with was no longer available. And we then responded with a coalition of 20 lawyers and managed to turn that around. So quite an interesting result. It's not that the US justice system brings justice, it's not that the US justice system is always unjust, but you have to bring justice to the US justice system. And if you have a big enough coalition with enough money, you can force a good verdict out of it. But the initial verdict by the same judge was that we were to be shut down. It's interesting you mentioned justice there, because I was going to ask you where the idea of WikiLeaks came from, but I mean having the sense I get from you is that you've been using the technology to mine this information, especially within authority for quite a long time. But there's really something, there's another element to it. There is an element of justice seeking about WikiLeaks, it seems to me, almost a moral element. I won't go as far as saying as a crusade, but there is a passion about it that's not just simply transparency, there's something else. No, the goal is just as the method is transparency. It's important not to confuse the goal and the method. So what I observed by looking at how the press worked and how successful activists campaigns were, is a very cheap and effective way of getting justice was finding information that people were spending effort on concealing and revealing it. Why do people spend effort on things? Well, because they believe it's going to benefit them. So when organizations spend effort to conceal something, they are making a statement, they're giving off an economic signal that if that information is revealed, it's going to have an effect. Otherwise, why would you spend the work? So in many of those cases, the effect that it will have is a push to reform the organization that is concealing some kind of abuse or some plan for some future abuse. And so by selectively going after that information, as opposed to all the other sorts of information out there, which they're a vast amount, we are able to selectively bring about just change. The arrival of WikiLeaks coincides with a whole almost a sense of permanent war. The term permanent war, perpetual war, is constantly used now in the United States. But we have two wars running together and others and other secret wars. In the information that you have revealed on WikiLeaks about these so-called endless wars, what has been the real high value material that has come out that has given people, ordinary people, if you like, the kind of information upon which they can then act. Looking at the enormous quantity and diversity of these military or intelligence apparatus inside the documents, what I see is a vast sprawling estate, what we would traditionally call the military intelligence complex or military industrial complex. And this sprawling industrial estate is growing, becoming more and more secretive, becoming more and more uncontrolled. This is not a sophisticated conspiracy controlled at the top. This is a vast movement of self-interest. Thousands and thousands of players are all working together and against each other to produce an end result, which is Iraq and Afghanistan and Colombia and keeping that going. What I see is we often deal with tax havens and people hiding assets and transferring money through offshore tax havens. So I see some really quite remarkable similarities. Guantanamo is used for laundering people to an offshore haven which doesn't follow the rule of law that we would normally expect. Tax haven is used for hiding people's assets, laundering people's assets through a jurisdiction which doesn't follow the rule of law that we would expect in our home countries. Similarly, Iraq and Afghanistan and Colombia are used to wash money out of the U.S. tax base and back arms companies and the generals and so on, which if you like non-profit versions. So that you can't just or you can't always pull out two billion bucks from the U.S. tax base and just say, hey, let's give it to an arms company straight away with no expectation of doing any work. But if you say this two billion dollars has got to go into Colombia, but the Colombian government has to buy U.S. arms and those arms have to be of a particular type, particular specification that only one of these arms companies has. Then that's just the way of laundering this back in the United States. What you're saying is that money and money-making is at the center of modern war and it's almost self-perpetuating. Yes, and it's becoming worse. The number of private companies that sprung up around Iraq, the number of private companies that are now supporting the national security agency. This has increased a hundred times in the past 10 years, number of companies. Now you have a school, a feeding school that is feeding off the U.S. tax base and is a lobby to make sure that those wars go on. You have two sorts of lobbies, you have offences lobbies and defensive lobbies. An offensive lobby tries to get new money that it didn't have before by lobbying the leaders of government. And a defensive lobby makes sure that companies continue to receive the money that they've been getting before. So now we're in a position in the United States where we have both enormous offensive lobbies and enormous defensive lobbies. But defensive lobbies always fight harder. They fight to keep the expectation of the money flow going. And that apparatus has been built up in the past 10 years. I think it's going to be extremely difficult to dismantle. What was your reaction when you first saw the Apache video that is now infamous? When I first saw this, we didn't know that there were journalists in it. We didn't know who they were. We didn't know the circumstances. We knew this was a tape of a helicopter attack and otherwise nothing. So I could immediately see that this was a riskful attack on people walking in the street in a relaxed manner. But I didn't know were they armed? Were they really the bad guys? They seemed incredibly relaxed. It seemed like this was an attack that was very provocative. So if these people were insurgents then they were insurgents on having a break playing on the street in a suburb. But as we dug deeper and deeper, the situation became more and more appalling. So we found that clearly, nearly all of these people were not armed. Clearly there were two cameramen there holding cameras, not arms. These cameramen turned out to be Reuters news reporters. Then looking at this wounded man crawling on the curb, we could, spending more time in the detail, it was clear that there was no arms being picked up, that he was just being rescued by a passerby. Could you hear the voices? Could you hear the voices from the helicopter at this point? Yeah we could hear the voices from the helicopter and you know, the grotesque language that soldiers have. What really struck me was not this very dark grotesque humor. I can accept that that people exercise black humor, very black humor sometimes in war. Rather it was another day at the office, fuel to all the proceedings, how routine it was to kill these 18 to 26 people and that a whole street covered with bodies. The reaction to that was nice. This tape from me and the other people involved made a nice and dirty word. We just couldn't see something as being nice anymore when a whole street covered with carnage is nice. The reaction, let me ask you, what did you make of the reaction to it in the media, the mainstream media reaction to the release of this video? We've been involved in obviously many different stories that have produced fall out in the United States and in other countries, but this one was of a degree and of a about a specific issue that we were able to sort of plot how all this unfolded and blew out and what the back reaction was. Initially on the TV networks there was an attempt to immediately downplay this. For example CNN, Wolf Blitzer, they took the first segment which is not the most appalling one, the first attack and then blanked out all the shooting and then said this was out of sympathy or deference to the families, but there's no blood here, you can just see dust coming up and then immediately started apologizing for the military saying oh well it's hard for our soldiers and a reminder that war is more difficult. No condemnation, not even any request for an inquiry which is the sort of neutral response. Well we don't want to blame people before all the facts are in although actually if you see the video you've got most of them, but we want to know everything about this, we want this inquiry to be opened, we want a full disclosure, we want to know why this video was withheld from Reuters for so long. So all we want to know were the children, the wounded compensated, did they leave, all these things, these are natural reactions, did not take place in the broadcast networks. Then for CNN and NBC there was I think a sort of internal revolt by journalists who were seeing other journalists mowed down in the streets of Baghdad. So a push back against the editorial management decision to treat it so briefly and in such a biased way. So the next day saw a sort of richer discussion and then it flipped. Then enormous editorial space both in the printed press and in TV press opened up for military apologies and no space opened up for anyone else including people with new facts, including the soldiers on the ground who were there, the only English speaking witnesses, the only US witnesses and the only soldiers speaking. Those people couldn't get into the mainstream press and couldn't get onto the TV. Talk about the one soldier who, his name is McCord, is that right? Yeah. One of the soldiers on the ground who was one of those you see arriving at the van. That's Ethan McCord. Ethan McCord is a soldier about 30 years old, was in the ground unit that was being serviced if you like by the Apaches in this area and they marched in and arrived to where the bodies were in the shooting up van and Ethan heard the child crying in the van hysterically and pulled out the girl, saw the boy and thought the boy was dead. Took the child away from the van to a sort of intermediary location and then went to look for anyone else in the van and just saw the boy was just breathing and pulling out. So he ended up being covered with the blood of his children and he was quite disturbed by this event and he got in contact with us immediately after the video was published and he produced a statement of a letter of apology to this family. Of course he wasn't involved directly with killing them but indirectly it was his unit that was being serviced by the Sipatian and indirectly he was part of the US Army in Iraq but he says that you know that he complained to the superiors about this event and they just told him to stop being a pussy and to suck it up and he's tried quite hard to draw attention to what happened in the mainstream to get the mainstream press interested in it within two days of us revealing the material. So why it was still newsworthy it can't be an excuse in the US press too well that the moment had passed and therefore okay yes his story is interesting but the moment has passed because at the very same time that he was trying to get his story across editorial space was being given to military apologists who were just you know war is hard and it's difficult. These things happen and you didn't show the full context and that's right there was shooting that morning so on and so on. Yeah and you know soldiers, it's difficult for soldiers to get whatever, not new facts whereas this soldier had new facts about what had happened then and an incident that happened immediately after. I mean what was interesting about him he also had an overview and he described what had happened that day as a common occurrence and he talked about if there's any kind of threat or perceived threat to American soldiers they would let everybody have it. He said let all the motherfuckers have it at 360 degrees. That's right, if there was an IED. If he was instructed by his commanding officer that if an IED goes off anywhere in the street then 360 degree rotational fire and just take out everyone, women, children, everyone gets it. I guess as is to try and act as a disincentive for the local population for supporting any IED placement and that's what happened. It's not that he was told that and it didn't happen but rather that happened and he was instructed so he and some other soldiers in this unit who didn't like that instruction apparently fired high when those orders came when an IED went off and they were instructed to fire those orders. What are the leaks around this issue tell you about whether this particular incident was as the US government claims an aberration or not? We've seen in other leaks I mean just a vast number of these type of incidents and when I say these type what I mean is indiscriminate attacks on civilians. Not deliberate attacks on civilians it's important to make clear but just not giving it down, not caring whether they are or whether they are. Sometimes occasional deliberate attacks on civilians but those do seem to be rare in the record but just you know maybe they are maybe they're not but we want to shoot and so go for it. Ethan McCord and one of his fellow soldiers who were in that ground unit they say that they were surprised it was this video that leaked because there were many many worse incidents and this was a sort of everyday occurrence. It's not every day that journalists are killed although I did read the statistic that there have been seven avoiders journalists killed in Baghdad and all of them were killed by the US military fire but probably the only reason we are talking about this now is because there were two journalists there and they were sort of trackable and voiders put in a freedom of information act request whereas if they weren't journalists if they were just regular citizens of Baghdad we wouldn't even be talking about it the material of this would have been buried there would have been no internal investigation at all which prompted the eventual leaking. So this is a kind of tip of an awful iceberg in many ways isn't it because a war like Iraq and a war like Afghanistan if not directed at civilians civilians become the casualties they're civilians wars in a way in a sense aren't they? No this is the old statement that absolute power corrupts absolutely and you can see from this video that when you're in an Apache with a zoom lens that can show you people's face from one mile up in the sky and you have a 30 millimeter cannon and you shoot and there's no effect against you you can't even hear the screams when you get back to base there's no discipline procedures against you but when this happens every day the days you know for a year of course it's incredibly corrupting and these people are shot in the same way that the everyday person walks over ants on the street because they just seem to be irrelevant they don't complain there's no discipline procedure and so as the war goes along civilians do become just something to get rid of because they're annoying or have no concern over and why there are some of these civilian massacre cases do achieve prominence and then do find genuine concern by some of the higher generals or by other groups looking into them that's not what we see for the everyday cases of civilian kills and we have acquired records of six years worth of civilian kills for Iraq and Afghanistan and not just the big ones where there's a hundred people killed or 20 people killed where there is some investigational publicity sometimes but rather these sort of everyday incidences where a man might be as in one case in Afghanistan a man is seen to be running away after US soldiers approach and they try and shoot him the guns jam so he's running towards the village so what do they do the guns are jammed they get the artillery and they shell him there's one man they launch shells towards him they overshoot hit the village and they kill a five-year-old boy so there's hundreds and hundreds of those small incidences which sort of reveal the the squalor of war at a microscopic detail it's not always these big kill events it's these little events where there's a lack of concern and care about the lethal engagement of the use of lethal force another example from Afghanistan is American troops going through an area not receiving fire but they see some unexploded ordnance they see a 1.5 meter shell that's sitting there in a sort of dusty area and could it be a booby trap possibly could be a booby trap might not I mean they could just walk past what should they do should they shoot it should they call in their bomb disposal squad which is what you normally do and have it taken care of oh they call an airstrike instead to take out just this one unexploded shell now presumably that these are guys in Afghanistan they're bored and we sit on they want to see what an airstrike's like up close it's very easy isn't it daytime they call an airstrike the airstrike overshoots the shell hits the village this is sort of just a lack of concern lack of care are these particular incidents from the documents that you've released in july yes that's right yeah and I mean there's hundreds can you just describe the almost the panorama of these documents they're across Afghanistan yeah and Iraq so for Afghanistan this is 91,000 reports by troops on the ground and by some intelligence people back at the base these are like done just after an event happens or are updated during the course of the day so there's raw data before before Pentagon spin doctors have had a chance to massage it although that said sometimes troops don't put things in there that might intimidate them either and for Iraq this is 490,000 reports over the same 490,000 overnight thousand over the same period of time that's a hell of a leak yeah that's a really extraordinary thing this is the the most fine the detailed history of war that has ever been disclosed besides times locations kill counts although the kill counts are sometimes massaged but kill counts people detained what happened from the US troops point of view now they're not reliable narrators but you can't hide everything when you're producing so much detail so quickly and I mean it's just extraordinary so we wrote a computer program to add up all these kill counts and so for Afghanistan this isn't hundreds of thousands hundreds of thousands it's important to remember this wasn't just a figure the aggregate figure of 100,000s this hundreds of thousands is a result of adding up all the individual cases which are documented the individual cases the highest kill count 480 or so related to a stampede that occurred on a bridge 480 people were killed checking this in the news reports seems like it was more like a thousand people were killed but in the internal US military report it was 480 people who were killed and but that's the single highest event that's a sort of unusual next one down was a US sweeping operation that killed about 300 some of these events are on the surface disturbing so the highest kill count event in Afghanistan killed 181 people in a US operation made by Canada called Operation Medusa in December 2006 and that kill count of 181 there was only one wounded one wounded one wounded it says no civilians were killed and there were no captures so if we then look at what was the sort of military hardware deployed so it it speaks about some ground force sweep and so on a couple of people being killed but nearly everyone who's been killed was killed by an AC 130 gunship so this is an AC 130 is a cargo plane which is being converted to have be decked out with machine guns and tank guns so saturation fire from from high up but as a plane that's moving yeah this is it's not exact and in the course of three hours 62 people were described as being killed by this and then there's also an unexplained missing 90 or so people were there how they are killed is not established in the report but they are listed as having been killed in two places how do they call these all Taliban the enemy yeah they're all called them looking at looking at that Operation Medusa kill that broader operation quite interesting I mean I hadn't heard about this before but this was the the biggest according to the Canadian military the biggest operation in Afghanistan post invasion and but Afghanistan wasn't when people's radioed December 2006 Iraq was but during that week they say they killed about a thousand Taliban but actually what happened is that this was in a region about 20k out of Kandahar where there's lots of vineyards and there's a government installed by US forces post the 2001 invasion have become extremely corrupt and the local people had grown to support the Taliban in sort of united effort to clean out this government and then when US and Canadian and when ISAF so the allied forces later the western forces yeah came in these people not just Taliban they do seem to have been Taliban there but the the local population was supported and so the main in the vineyards the the workers in the vineyards were killed along with these others and it seems to we read the press reports the time some press says 50 50 50 percent Taliban 50 percent local people it's pretty hard to gauge from the on the on the ground reporting but we look at events like this live document shows and we see something pretty disturbing a lot of people killed very little time using indiscriminate fire um no investigation into 181 people being killed the biggest kill single event in Afghanistan post 2001 it doesn't it doesn't smell right yeah I suppose that those doing the killing who I'm assuming they regard everybody as the Taliban or as insurgents well the pattern so who isn't children the pattern the pattern we see in Iraq and Afghanistan the very clear pattern and it's not just me who sees this but other war reporters is that anyone who's a man is and dead is an insurgent that's how they're always listed on the reports and it's only after there's some investigation usually stimulated by the press or by competing military reporting on it that then there's a sort of pull down from that number yeah so not in any man who is dead is a surgeon or Taliban children if their bodies are whole enough to see and remember things like 30 millimeter cannon fire will decimate the body are listed as children so they're not the citizens insurgents and women can go either way and so as an example if we look at Kundus this is an airstrike that occurred in Afghanistan last year where it was called in by the German military petrol tankers about three kilometers away from German military positions had been put in a riverbed and the local people were unlaid unlaid the petrol from them taking us off now the allegation is that the Taliban hijacked these petrol tankers and within giving the petrol to the local population which is quite possibly true I mean maybe they're trying to carry favor with the population but the reality is there was over a hundred people clustered around this tanker taking the petrol and they weren't going in there they're sitting there so airstrike was called in and killed most of these people yet when we look at the internal military reporting by the United States what we see is in his legal reports 57 insurgents killed when we look at the internal military reporting for the claddle murders of Iraq massacre which included two Reuters journalists that happened in July 2007 what we see is 14 people killed and there were actually between 18 to 26 people killed and all of them insurgents except for two children who were wounded so even the Reuters cameramen were listed as insurgents until Reuters came in contact and said hey where's our camera but I mean for you to receive that volume of documentation suggests that there must be something of a rebellion going on within the system yes I mean it's the one hopeful thing is in fact there are good people in the US military there are good people in military intelligence organizations and some of those people have had enough and so they provide provide us with evidence of abuse and I mean that's it is a it's sort of another way of being a conscientious objective in fact arguably a far more powerful way of projecting to the board and what about among journalists is there a rebellion amongst journalists you said some time ago I think the journalists need to respect their readers and viewers um how how did how did journalists by and large react to WikiLeaks of course some are very impressed obviously but you've described for example the reaction in the United States with CNN and NBC and CBS and so on as journalists being used to justify it so how do journalists how are journalists dealing with the arrival of WikiLeaks yeah a very interesting mixture so you know it seems like all the good journalists support us and all the all the bad ones don't but of course maybe that's just my interpretation based upon their support probably a good interpretation but um it does seem that the the more accomplished and independent the journalists the more they are likely to support us the more they are able in fact to more establish they are as an independent journalist with their own independent reputation that they can choose to take from one newspaper to another they can choose to take from one network to another if they're stuffed around um it seems like the more they are able to state their support for us whereas the journalists who are not in that position of freedom that are more part of the group of the company that they're company men um they're more likely to be critical because your very WikiLeaks is very threatening to systems and the BBC is a system the network making this documentary ITV is a system the individual journalists as opposed to the organizations that they're working in are supportive of us in that they may be able to collaborate with us or use our material and that can be extremely important material and some people have an ability to see that and they want to help them and so get that material out to public or bring extra angles in on it or use their existing understanding to help flesh it out so they see us as you know as um colleagues and then we have a group that sees us as competition that sees us as a threat and in the regular sort of competitive news competitive sense but also in that we are demanding certain standards certain higher levels of information harder to get information and the use of primary sources in material that has been released in print so that makes them have to work harder so they see us as a threat and then there's another group that appreciates appreciates what we're doing because we're drawing the fire that we are the pre-pressed vanguard we are the sort of defender whistleblowers and we move that whole field further out and that creates the sort of a vacuum behind us into which these people can come which doesn't have any fire because we're attracting the opposition by pushing them forward and that's quite nice because over the last four years we have been changing the standard so to some degree we are now the status quo we are something that exists there's an economic and political social niche you're the mainstream go quite that far but but there's an understanding of political and economic understanding that there is a place for we here in this world and that if we were to disappear that would be something new I was quite yeah it's quite interesting that how I you've shifted in I mean here the Guardian media pages every year this 100 most important media people you've probably seen this this year they've included you this year 58 but last year we weren't in there at all that's quite an improvement the fact that you're in there is interesting very interesting I mean I it's true we do have some influence but I think it's also the case that those people in the Guardian have put that list together I'm sure it's totally accurate list but I'm sure that's also a desire there's a desire for us to be leading in that way and that they want to support support us see that we do something beneficial for them which is to to open up this space I mean there's there's clearly a big shift underway and we've talked about this already but the shift is from traditional so-called mainstream journalists journalism to what has become known as citizen journalism it is that is that a very significant shift now it is it is the whole nature of journalism likely to change because of this this trend it is changing and the changes will be dramatic but I'm not one to sell citizen journalism as being at the moment being a great answer yet and because what I see in the alternative press is very little journalism going on in fact what I see is people taking the front page in New York Times using that as their issue of the day and saying I don't agree with it or I do agree with it and when our idea is that our material would spark tremendous amounts of citizen journalism because all these people who write opinion pieces on blogs and so on when given the complaint why are you doing any real journalism why are you going research or investigating something they say well it takes a long time to build up sources so we don't have anything new to talk about so we have to just analyze what the mainstream press are doing so but we have produced the hundreds of thousands or millions of millions of pages of new source material that these people could analyze and could report and it's extremely rare that they do so the the pacific example that I like to use is where you got hold of a classified US intelligence report into what happened in the war in Fallujah so this was a left cause celebrity that invasion of the town of Fallujah in Iraq in 2004 of course Iraq itself had already been invaded but Fallujah was some kind of holdout to the new government that had been put in place by the United States the coalition provisional authority and that the circumstances of that invasion US contractors going through this area had been killed anyway so not wanting to go into the detail but that was a very bloody invasion and it ended up with a pullout and a reinvasion some five months later so what were the circumstances everyone knew that all sorts of tragedy had occurred in that town this report in fact revealed both how things progress militarily how things progress politically spoke specifically about Paul Bremer who was the the head of the coalition regional authority the role of Al Jazeera in that town of the media war as well as the on the ground war the different tribal regions classified secret by a US army ground intelligence so we took this classified US intelligence report about Fallujah and released it so all citizen journalists academics employee journalists would analyze it write about it call up the US military ask them about it ask the countries involved human rights groups what was going on etc this was the the raw primary ingredient that you needed to actually do some journalism and mail this out to 3,500 people on our mailing list and the result was not a single citizen journalist did anything the first person to publish was a friend Sean Waterman at UPI who's the national security reporter and then another five professional press journalists not all of them full-time journalists some working for the Asia Times half-time and working for Keto Institute half-time as an example of one of these five but the bloggers the political activists of all kinds in fact didn't do anything with this material so I mean that's interesting so real information or can almost paralyze as if they don't know what to do with it well over time we are seeing that we're sort of training people up a bit so it's getting better over time people are starting to become used to this military information and on the glacier understanding that when we release it is definitely true but yeah it a very surprising effect I mean that report as an example it looked good it wasn't just that it had the important details it wasn't too long it was only it was accessible it was accessible it had a nice map of Fallujah on the front split into tribal and no one picked it up no one picked it up and eventually professional press picked it up hmm you're making some very serious enemies not least of all a government engaged in two rapacious wars how do you deal with what must be a sense of that danger do you ignore it or do you accommodate it within yourself so not at all I I think you know a lot of people say are we very courageous in our work and I wouldn't reject that label entirely we're not uncourageous but to me courage is not the absence of fear at all courage is the intellectual mastery of fear if I understand it so we just understand what the risks are and having understood them we're able to navigate the path through them one of my good friends who's a reporter for the standard newspaper in Kenya investigative head whenever he is about to publish a big story exposing the Kenyan government and they were rated the newspapers rated by the police couple of years ago um he publishes he goes to Tanzania he waits to see what happens eventually he becomes clear what's going to happen and he comes back if he doesn't understand the risk if he understands the risk can he see that it's relatively low risk then he publishes any states in Nairobi and so that's how we work what what what what do you do because you're I've been thought unlikely to go to the United States at the moment well in July of 2010 I had three speaking engagements in the United States including one at the investigative reporters and editors conference in Las Vegas a panel there with Scott Ryzen times national security reporter and Valerie Plain was also in the panel I canceled my visit to the United States because of some information that was coming out from our sources within the US administration saying that it would be a danger to me to go to United States in the in the Pentagon recently I asked the assistant secretary of defense Brian Whitman uh this I said can you as a senior official of the United States government can you give a guarantee that the editors of WikiLeaks and the editor in chief himself who is not American that you are not in danger that they themselves will not be subjected to the kind of hunt that we've read about in the media and his reply in a nutshell well first of all it's not my position to give guarantees on anything I mean how do you feel about that more it sounds like keeping all options on the table to me and but they're not good options are they I don't I don't want to dramatize this too much but you're in a sort of unique position in a way aren't you I don't think there's been a WikiLeaks before there hasn't and they don't know how to deal with us and there's no I mean something that has preserved us is that there's no in the United States or in any other country there is no department to deal with WikiLeaks most of those government departments are split up into regional focuses so there's no sort of specialist in dealing with what we are or understanding what we are or understanding how to deal with this but I mean there's serious statements coming out of the U.S. administration under the surface that imply that they would not follow the rule of war that's a they would not follow the rule and imply that they would not follow the rule of war and that that is a serious matter there's a certain record there yeah and there were senior figures like Sy Hirsch giving me warnings a famous U.S. National Security Report and so when we listened those warnings and took appropriate security precautions that said I think our political position in countries like United Kingdom, Australia, Iceland, Germany and other countries with less strength is such that it is impossible to arrest me here in the United Kingdom politically it is just not possible to do that and why some intermediary bureaucrat might do it and not understand the political risk eventually the matter would be pushed up high enough and you know people with better understanding of politics will go do not do that that's just going to create a terrible political dilemma for everyone concerned don't do it. I note your pre-emptive strike in response when you posted on WikiLeaks a leaked Pentagon document that says that the U.S. intelligence intends to destroy WikiLeaks and the words used are that they would want it to fatally marginalize the organization and destroy our center of gravity by using sort of military language which is what they say is the trust that sources and public happiness they can destroy that then they can stop U.S. military whistleblowers coming to us and they say the word whistleblower I mean they're they're not talking about or at least not just talking about unauthorized disclosures which may or may not be revealing abuse they are saying whistleblowers people who reveal abuse they give examples examples given our Guantanamo Bay released the main menace for this which revealed that they are hiding people from the Red Cross falsifying documents and so on. Fallujah and abuses that we revealed there and a number of other cases so these are they are upset with us because we are revealing abuses and embarrassing the United States military so we released that report which was written in 2008 we released this earlier in 2010 as maybe as a pre-emptive strike I mean it's putting them on notice and by us releasing that there is an understanding that didn't come from nowhere that report clearly came from some intelligence insiders in the United States we have support inside the U.S. intelligence community so it is it is difficult and dangerous for people within the U.S. intelligence community to try and investigate us because there will be dissidents that will step forward and reveal that so they have to tread very carefully what happens when you return to Australia your homeland because when you went back recently they took away your passport saying that it was look worn and something you perhaps needed a new one but miraculously you didn't need a new one they gave it back to sometime later and just a little bit after that they also searched my bags and made references to Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Australian Federal Police specific information that had to have come off their database file so it's quite interesting in Australia I mean there is a sort of patriotism in Australia that is proud of WikiLeaks and proud of me and that is defensive and as a result there have been very positive articles in Fairfax Press and in the Australian so I'm told by my politically connected people in Australia that it would be extremely difficult to arrest me, detain me or deport me or our other volunteers in Australia that said that there has been extensive spying on our people in that country which I assume has been agreed to in some way by the Australian government and we have some information about the Australian government being involved in that. Is it hard after a while to keep these shadows at bay? Do you get used to them? You must say to yourself look I can't become paranoid about this you know I'm going to live a normal life is that difficult? Oh it's become pretty easy I mean we have some security precautions we have some security procedures we have different people doing different things in different places depending on their need for security for me I mean it doesn't matter if I'm followed around I'm provided I'm not meeting with a source. Quite a few BBC journalists who have got in touch with me and want to talk about the pressure within the BBC in other words they represent the kind of rebellion that you're describing what would you say to people like them in an institution like the BBC or indeed journalists who are led by their conscience or just by their professional integrity within certain organisations what would you say to them what can they do? Oh when your stories are killed get them to us and we'll publish them that's the simplest one or when the primary source material is suppressed get them to us I mean you don't have to leave the institution you can work on the inside and on the outside and keep this line between the two invisible. So what they can't get on air and what they can't get in the paper give to WikiLeaks? Yeah and unfortunately that doesn't you know there's no there's not so much career motivation do that because you kind of stick your name on it at the time but later on maybe you can put your name on it you know when you leave the institution. What wouldn't you accept? What wouldn't you publish? What leak wouldn't you publish? Unlike every other news organisation we say precisely in policy what we will and will not accept the material that we publish so we say to whistleblowers we will take material it hasn't appeared before it is been some force suppressing it legal or threat of violence or being fired and it is a diplomatic political ethical or historical significance and that you didn't write yourself so provided it fits that we will publish it now we might go through some harm minimisation process in the interim so the only forms that that has taken is as example the British National Party when we published their secret membership list we contacted all these people ahead of time and we said no we're going to publish this in a few days we're giving you the heads up just in case this you know your telephone number being public and so it causes problems you go and sort it out so that has always worked so far we're aware of no instance where anyone has come to any sort of physical harm as a result of anything we've published we are aware of quite a few results where people have been fired or lost elections as a result of things that they've published but that seem to be on the side of the angels if at some stage that policy doesn't seem to be working then we will create a new policy remember our goal is just as our means of transparency we don't confuse these two the propaganda efforts of governments has become vast I read an AP investigation that said the US were spending four point had spent four point seven billion over the last five years on basically winning hearts and minds not of the enemy but of its own people yeah I mean this this kind of information war and portray us general portray us and his counterinsurgency manual refers to wars of perception in which the media is is one of the weapons so information war has never been more important but what happens when wiki leaks runs into the united kingdom which has some of the most draconian secrecy laws in the world such as the official secrets act is it more difficult here to to mine information we haven't found a problem publishing UK information I mean when we look at the official secrets act label documents we see a state that it is an offense to retain the information and it is an offense to destroy the information so the only possible outcome is that we have to publish the information and that's what we have done on many many occasions I noticed one that one of one of those that I had a personal interest in was one that from the Ministry of Defense classified document that equated terrorists with investigative journalists as threats and Russian spies and Russian spies as in fact in many sections of that report investigative journalists are the number one threat to the sort of information security of the Ministry of Defense that was a 2000 page document on how to stop leaks from the Ministry of Defense which which we leaked I didn't know whether to be offended or honored but it's nice nice to be having an impact I highly recommend following John Pilger's work there's no doubt about that I think he went come back we appreciate that or this is oh no god no not demographers you know oh god come back we appreciate all the points even negative ones oh my god yeah maybe just like I said it just needs to be better himself to attract better people in a circle right oh my god don't you dare go like if John Pilger John Pilger is amazing and his website is here and I'll provide this I highly recommend following his work and if you've never watched John Pilger documentaries I highly recommend watching his documentaries year zero is absolutely brilliant okay on try today's how are you doing the mark level ear poison ear poison spectral shot indeed hey chichou glad to glad to have caught the stream we'll have to watch from beginning later on okay most of the stream was just basically this interview with Julian Assange on Charlie's and it's a fantastic interview highly recommend this the first interview of John Pilger with Julian Assange Tyson tear used to be like him yeah many people I've met many people that just have a such a negative attitude towards life which is their choosing to a certain degree I realize the world society economics politics can beat you down but it is your choice if you choose to acquire that perspective of the world or rise above it so good on you Tyson for coming out of that why is extremely important question to ask to grow yeah indeed Tyson Emily pleasure don't might the 98 we forget is a phenomenal doc John John Pilger has put out some amazing documentaries and that's about two hours gang there's so much that we left on the table I think we're going to slowly start doing more Julian Assange streams as as the date of the hearing the judgment from the show trial comes to be I think it's January 4th so I think we're going to do more of these Julian Assange streams and I think what we're going to do is read articles watch videos watch interviews there's a documentary series or talk show series that Julian Assange put out through RT that has like seven or eight episodes and all of those are what worth watching phenomenal discussions about technology and information okay on Charlie I don't see the point of having a negative viewpoint on life you only live once might as well enjoy it might as well right some people tend to be dramatic too dramatic right so personally when I come across people that oh my car got scratched oh you know someone bumped into me oh this oh this oh humanities or humanities I tend to sort of distance myself slowly away from them if they're older if they're older it basically means they've they've indoctrinated themselves like to break down those barriers and those that mindset the neuro the neurons the connections of negativity negativity that they have built for themselves is very difficult right that's why you know the realm of entheogens is a great way to shatter the mind right Maldagrass too great vid very ASMR as you said yeah huge huge I love this interview by the way it's one of my I've only watched it twice I watched well three times I guess I watched it again yesterday as well but I watched it a couple times the first time it came out and then watched it again and it's it's a good interview to remind yourself what's at stake right I'm sleepy heavenly sense I put an interview of Chen Gurcha Chen in the preview section of your discord awesome thanks a lot post apocalypse Tyson terror what he was saying wasn't necessarily untrue but he was not getting the reason why things are the way that that way and that you can change it if you understand what's actually happening indeed I mean the basically if we have transparency of power then we can hold power accountable one of the problems in our societies is that the crimes of centralized power and those elite those who have been put in positions of power may they be corporations or individuals the crimes that they have committed have only been leaked available to the public decades after the fact that's why the United States government has this or every government has this time where you know top secret stuff can only be really revealed after 50 years or something like this that's because we can't hold whoever committed those crimes accountable if we have transparency of power in real time which is what wiki leaks is providing okay it's a game changer then we can hold people accountable that's why the discussion during these elections in the united states is is is garbage because people are saying oh we're going to start holding people accountable wait a second from now on wait a second you can hold people accountable right now but they're not they're not holding the leaders in either democratic or republican party accountable for their crimes so everybody's lost in a in in rhetoric in garbage really i wonder if they will stop uh remembers day this month is it remembers day this month i think we all get i think we all get i think we all get there at some point it's just a shame many wait till their later ages before before coming to the realization what they've missed it's a sad shame when you think of it yeah indeed mc right i've met some people that they look back and they they realize they've written off three decades of their lives because of their negativity now if that's what you're referring to and for them to begin to change their life for the positive it's extremely difficult extremely difficult some have been able to do it majority will not okay you also get into trouble taking your small sample size of observations and applying it to humanities a whole and agreed agreed a fish named squish and i love your name example i have had some bad experiences with humans so all humans are bad got the questions absolute statements indeed games don't vote for someone that is supposed to okay so just because there's elections happening i'm how do we delete your this post of yours well i'm going to time you out because if you were paying attention did it delete yeah nice uh if you're paying attention the elections are irrelevant okay in large part in large part snow massage will be viewed by histories heroes too bad it won't help them now they are viewed as heroes and truth tellers by by many of us and those who consider asange and snow them to be the the bad guys they can kiss my ass on charted a chicho will you be doing a video on the elections i hadn't planned on it on charter days uh if heroes laugh i believe regarding the image the bomb not bright uh i wasn't planted on on charter days because it's not going to be over after today and i've mentioned before what will make or break the united states of america is us foreign policy not a circus like really a circus people are concerned about a circus with the with the puppets being two two human beings that i would not invite to my house for dinner like no rush rush home when i saw notifications let's go avoid we're at the end of love it avoid love it brother or sister of course right sorry i was uh stealing the message aha ah you were ah so you took a screencap a vote for biden continues a funnel money into israel to wipe out palestinians a vote for trump continues to funnel money into israel to wipe out palestinians i think i'll pass on that one mic i'm 100 with you right i'm 100 with you i'll vote for a beautiful salad dressing tonight awesome make post apocalyptic lips focusing on any particular politicians often a distraction because the problems are often systematic and they they point fingers at each other to dodge fixing those problems indeed indeed poor void on chart today chicho i agree with you that the elections is irrelevant but i think we need more people saying this and it would be interesting to hear your thoughts on it okay on chart today's uh if you remind us of discord i'll plan on we do current event stream so in the next current event stream we can definitely focus on the elections um now nothing's going like there are certain like here's the kicker right like anybody that's voting voting for not anybody but anybody that actually is voting for biden because they like biden is an idiot anybody that's voting for trump because they actually like trump is an idiot right but those who are trashing trump are because of his uh because of his deportation policies policies never spoke a word when obama was deporting more people than trump never spoke a word when obama was starting wars right like according to official definition of starting wars right trump officially hasn't started any wars he's the only president doesn't start any war since carter every other president has been in ground war right like it's just a facade anyway it's a joke uh laugh out loud tony chicho asans is a bad guy and he is in jail and the global menace tony don't crack me up your laugh out loud tony you forgot to slash sarcasm personally i don't know asans on a personal level but what he has done has been a huge huge boom for humanity okay he has done more for humanity than um than anyone that i can think of off the top of my head and if you give me a month maybe i'll try to dig up something someone uh that has done more to bring transparency and accountability of power for humanity than asans but right now and i've been at this game for a while there is no one that i can name that has done more to bring freedom to us than julien assange and i don't give a rat's ass if in person i wouldn't want to be friends with him i respect his work all right this is not about his personality this is about his work right a fish named squash squish there are lots of similarities between the parties there are also important differences of things like reproductive rights uh same sex marriage order this in france and again uh a fish uh a fish named squish i'll i'll say this again what will make or break the united states of america is us foreign policy not us domestic policy you're talking about us domestic policy us domestic policy is irrelevant what you're seeing take place in the united states of america's blowback from what everything the united states has done around the globe over the last few decades it is us foreign policy that will make to break the united states of america not us domestic policy it won't it won't matter chicho he's a part of the forces of this integration rather than integration uh information elder god actually i know one david has elder god says especially when the spongebob movie make two sides of same coin political pony show to keep one assertive in the idea that they have a voice when in reality not even the ones we perceive to be to be in power actually has any real power a great agree behind closed doors is where one needs to look i love it gang let's call the stream thank you for being here mods thank you for staying top of things uh gang thank you for the discussion thank you for the questions thank you for your perspective on things and thank you for making sure that you're informed on what's taking place on uh regarding the greatest uh trial in a century the most important trial in the century the biggest show trial that i've ever heard i've ever even read about it's unprecedented right name in years takes off the cigarette mix says thanks for the stream have a great day everyone have a great day everyone and gang uh if you want to know what this is about i'm on patreon patreon.com forward slash chicho chy cho you want to for follow this work patreon is a fantastic way to do so i don't point anything behind pay balls everything's great of commons share and share like uh friend for those of you who've been supporting this work through patreon thank you very much for your support it is in large part because of your support that i'm able to do this as well as support we've been getting from twitch because this is where we're live streaming we have mods taking care of business we have people participating in these live streams and giving us feedback and we've built up a huge discord channel where people are sharing a lot of information there's a lot of transparency going around it is fantastic gang thank you for the follows thank you for the subs as well everyone and the discussions we do announce these live streams 30 minutes before we go live on l o minds vk parlor gab and twitter you can follow the work there for live streams where we don't have any visuals we will be uploading the audio to soundcloud and as podcasts and they should be available on your favorite podcasting platforms and we will be uploading this video to both bitchute and youtube and if you want to support this work on bitchute and youtube you can follow you can share you can like you can comment and if you're on youtube you can join youtube membership okay gang thanks for being here everyone and uh i'm going to take a few days upload all the streams that we've done onto bitchute and youtube um i have a couple comic book calls coming in i'll do most likely unannounced comic book calls this week and um and we'll see where things go everybody i don't care uh what your perspective is good luck stay positive be good okay and uh start having a positive outlook on life and make sure make sure you support the free flow of information and decentralization and learn your mathematics bye everyone