 Can we talk about your contact with Julian through his childhood? It's part of the story, I think. It isn't part of the story. The story is that, you know, I'm attempting, in my own modest way, to get Julian out of the ship. Tumen Afanj is the hero of our time. He was the dawdling of the lap. All of a sudden, he's a puppet of Russia. My name is John Shipton. I'm Julian Afanj's father. WikiLeaks founder Julian Afanj has been arrested. One of the most notorious and controversial figures in custody. We'll remain behind bars until that extradition hearing, which has been set down for the end of February. We urge the Department of Justice to drop the charges. The maximum jail sentence of 175 years. Because he published the truth. How does it feel to be the father of such a controversial figure, somebody who's not known around the world? Was that him on the phone before? Yeah. Yeah. What are you talking about on a kind of regular basis? If Julian is extradited to the United States to face these charges, he will be the first, but not the last. What are your worst bits? That it just collapses under the strain. It looks as though what jail is due for living is seen to be a criminal act. Shipton, keep it up, man. Thank you. I wish I had your energy. I really do. I've done it. I've done it. I've done it. I mean, I don't fucking know now. Why do you think there's not a great public love and support? This is really a trillial, good question. What's at stake? If he goes down, so will journalism. But if people walked away from this film, understanding you, how would you feel about that? We're here, and this has only come about because we have a child in the ship, and I want to get him out. Get out your notebook. There's more. Welcome to CN Live, Season 4, Episode 9, The Assange Family Struggle. I'm Joe Laurier, Editor-in-Chief of Consorting News. Later today in London, Westminster Magistrates Court will send an extradition order from prison to be given to Republican Julian Assange to British Home Secretary Prateep Patel. This comes after the UK Supreme Court declined to hear Assange's appeal of a high court decision to allow the extradition to the United States to go ahead. Assange faces 175 years in prison for publishing accurate information revealing prima facie evidence of war crimes by the United States. While the issues of press freedom and democracy itself are front and centre, there is a human side to Assange's story that is rarely seen. That side is revealed in a new film called Ithaca by Australian director Ben Lawrence. It tells the story of a father and a wife struggle to save his son and her husband. The film follows Assange's father, John Shipton, and his wife Stella Assange during the days of Assange's extradition hearing in February and September 2020, and Shipton's journeys throughout the United States and Europe to gain support for his son with governments and the public. Ben Lawrence sent his apologies that he cannot be here with us today, but John Shipton and Assange's brother Gabriel Shipton are with us now on CN Live to discuss the film and their struggle to free Assange. Thank you John and Gabriel for being with us. Thank you. You're welcome. I'd like to start before we talk about the case, what's happening right now in London. I wanted to talk a little bit about the film. The origins of the film, you were instrumental in how it started and how you hooked up with Ben Lawrence. Can you tell the audience briefly where this idea of the film comes from? Yeah, so I guess over the years I've never really been too involved with WikiLeaks or anything like that. Recording in progress. But I did go and visit Julian many times over the years, you know, whether it was Ellingham Hall or in the Ecuadorian Embassy. And in 2019, after he was taken from the Embassy to Belmush Prison, I went to visit him there with John Shipton and John Pilger. And it was during that time that he was being kept in the health wing of the prison. He was under solitary confinement 23 hours a day, you know, pretty intense conditions. And that day I'd never seen him like that. Over all the years, you know, no matter how bad it got in the Embassy, you know, after 2017 or anything like that, I'd never seen him in a state like that. So I left prison that day thinking that, you know, I might not see him again and that I had to sort of do, you know, I had to do what I could to, you know, to try and do something to get him out of that jail. I'm a filmmaker, I'm a film producer, so we started thinking, well, how can we sort of make a film that is more, you know, an emotional journey, sort of a film that has an emotional hook for audiences, something that is a humanistic telling of this portion of this Julian's persecution. And that's when we started following John, you know, he was travelling around, travelling around Europe and the UK and Australia and we started following him with a camera and the sort of essence of the story developed, which was a father's fight to free his son, you know, something that was the sort of big door, I guess, that we decided that we wanted to go with, you know, which father wouldn't do anything to save their son. We wanted to try and connect with people on that very basic level, as well as, you know, include information about Julian's persecution and, you know, what's happened to him, how he's been treated by the CIA. So we shot, I think for about six or seven months before the hearing started and it was just before the hearing that Ben Lawrence as our director came on board. And gave the film some structure. There's over 13 hours of interview with John that sort of forms the backbone of the film. And if you've seen the trailer, you can see some of the interviewing style in the trailer, which makes it really unique, I think, and something really special that Ben the director was able to bring to the movie. And then we sort of went into, you know, after the extradition hearing, we continued to film, but we went deep into the editing process and edited for about 30 or 40 weeks of intense editing. Karen Johnson, our editor, had to make her way through, I think it was 180 or two, about 180 and 200 days of observational footage to sort of weave together these two stories. You know, we started off with John, but it wasn't at the time, Stella was still Julian's secret, you know, Stella and her children and Julian's children were still Julian's secret family. So we started, you know, when when Stella was exposed in some court documents and she decided to, you know, take control of her public image and start to be a more public and a more public voice to Julian. That's when we started to follow her as well. So it became a sort of dual protagonist story, which, which is what it is today. What was the target audience for this film? Well, I think it's people who have sort of have an interest but may have to have an interest in the cause and an interest in Julian's plight but, you know, may have turned off over the years. You know, may have been sort of propagandised, I guess, by the constant, constant media barrage, but still have an interest in the case, still have an interest, you know, in, you know, what's happening to Julian. So, you know, it's a way for to come to bring those people in and show them a different side to this story that they usually are reading through the media headlines. So I think it's people who are really still interested, still active, but have sort of left it behind. And this is a way to sort of reconnect in a different way, other than say, you know, through the news and the Guardian or any of those sort of corporate media. What about hardcore supporters of Julian who know the story very well? What will they get out of this film? I think they'll get a lot. It's probably, you know, I think for them it's more a behind the scenes look at things, something that, you know, they sort of see the very public work that John and Stella do, but they don't know, you know, what's happening behind the scenes. So John and Stella had very, very intimate access with John and Stella and that was able to, you know, we're able to show aside a very personal side, the personal toll that this takes on very real people. And I think, yeah, the support supporters out there, you know, we'll be able to have it like a behind the scenes look at this at this sort of campaign that's been going on for years and years. So John Shipton is indeed the star of the film, one could say, and it focuses on his journeys around Europe, Australia and the US. We get a pretty unvarnished view of you, John. I'm wondering how you feel you, the way, how do you feel about the way you came off in this film, the way you presented, you're happy with the way you. Oh, that's a powerful question. You know, I just sort of more or less a private individual and I find it very awkward to watch myself. So I've only done so once and also when I'm sitting outside the theater and hear my voice coming through the doors, I think to myself, oh my God, there he is again, pontificating away. So, you know, I don't mind the truth, you know, I'm not frightened of the truth and I'm not frightened of being a flawed human being. But as for watching myself being a flawed human being all the time. Yeah, well, you know, you've got a salty tongue in the film and you come off a little bit cantankerous, but it's kind of human relief. There's the most poignant moment for the film is not to give anything away as when Stella's giving a BBC interview and has to be paused and you're in the background grumbling about one thing or another. What do you, what do you think, John, what do you think the audience learns about Julian in this movie? Sorry, what does the audience learn about Julian? Well, the integrity and determination of a loyal family, they learned that. The closeness and passion with which Stella engages with Julian and his battle for freedom. The two beautiful children that are the blessings from a relationship, a development of love, amidst the most depraved circumstances. There's the blessing of two beautiful children and the engagement of Julian and Stella. So that's what they can learn. As for, as for Julian himself, you can see that he has his, in the film he has his profound moments of depression and equally warmth, care and curiosity about how his children are growing up in the world. Well, thank you, John. You can see John is still on the road advocating for his son. He's sitting in the back of a van on his way to Canberra. Elizabeth, you had some questions about the film, I think, and then we'll move on to the court case and what's happening in London today. Absolutely. John, you've talked about, you know, being a private individual and you've both spoken about how this film shows the humanity of, you know, Julian, but also the family. How difficult was it to go from a private citizen, as you mentioned, to front and centre of Julian's sort of public support system? Oh, well, you know, you used to read books about entertainers that one favoured or liked very much and how they would sometimes vomit before going on to the stage and all that sort of thing. I used to think, you know, why just, I mean, you know, they should be used to it by now and such unsympathetic thoughts went through my head. Well, you know, I was wrong. You don't get used to it and it becomes quite unbearable to watch yourself. And also, for some reason or other, it's really exhausting. I just don't, you know, get it. You finish these things and you think, oh, well, it's over. But the wind down period is like four or five. Very strange. Do you have any comment on the case going forward in terms of filming again? Is there any chance of, you know, given the fact that so much has changed since a lot of the film was, you know, taped? Is there any chance you all will do some sort of part two or are you continuing to film or anything like that? We're doing a little bit of filming here and there and, you know, maybe down the track there will be an update. I think Ben, Ben sort of, we sort of crafted the film that we would sort of only really need an update if, you know, Julian was released. The sort of ongoing persecution is that that's the sort of feeling that I think the audience is left with this sort of never ending persecution. So we still are doing little bits and pieces of filming, but this is just, you know, this is one film of so many, there are so many, so much, so many films out there about Julian and this is a point of time, a personal look. And so I think, you know, if we look at all the other, you know, all the books that are written, all the films that are made and everything about this, about Julian's circumstances, I think, you know, it's nice to have it as a sort of one small personal piece that fits within all these great works that have been made. And speaking of that persecution, Gabriel, has Belmarsh reacted in any way to Julian being shown or heard on camera in the way that he was in this film? No, they haven't. I don't expect they will. But, you know, we'd like to keep that sort of for audiences to see in the cinema. We've been very, you know, very careful about, you know, where the film is being shown and things like that. So, no, they haven't. And that, at least my next question, which is when will this film or will this film be available outside Australia for audiences to take a look at? So that's what we're working on at the moment. We're hoping, you know, sometime after June we'll start working on an international release. We hope to do the same style of release that we're doing here in Australia, you know, sort of grassroots screenings around the country where we get to talk to people directly with Q&A or different kinds of events around the film. So I've been getting heaps of demand, you know, messages every day from people over in the US and the UK saying, when can we have it? When would they? So there's lots of demand. And I think it's going to be, you know, it'll have a long life in that sense, which I'm very sort of happy to keep working on that. Yeah, definitely a huge demand, I imagine. Just one last broader question before I turn it back over to Joe. Can you, I thought one really good point in the film was in general the fact that this case doesn't just decide journalism, it also has a huge impact on the success of activism in, you know, a myriad of different forms, like whatever type of activism you're into, this case is really going to have a huge implication for that. So can you comment on that on the fact that the media does not address Julian's story to the degree it addresses a lot of, you know, activist type issues, whether it's, you know, animal rights, the climate, police brutality on and on and on. Just your thoughts on that issue. I think, you know, particularly Julian's been maligned so often and by, you know, every single group is sort of, there's a different angle that he's been, you know, maligned by like, you know, whether it's, you know, all these sort of arguments, you know, the Trump thing or, you know, whether that's Swedish or all these sort of ways that, you know, the systems has used to sort of turn people off and let them think that it's okay for this persecution to continue. Even the legal proceeding is one of those, you know, there's a section of society that says, well, you know, he's in Italy, he'll get justice, he's in front of the courts. So it's all these things that are put up before everyone so that they're allowed to sort of switch off and say, well, this is okay. And I think, you know, it's through the film that, you know, we try and say to them, look, you know, look what's happening. Show like really shine a light. Look what's actually happening to real people here. It's not, you know, this isn't okay. This wouldn't be okay for your child or your brother. So I think that, you know, by attaching that sort of emotion to the story, I'm hoping we can cut through all that, all the maligning that's been happening over the years. Thank you. I gave her last question about the film. Have you submitted it to film festivals for awards, for example. Yeah, we certainly have. We've submitted to a few overseas and we're campaigning, you know, with those festivals to get them in. We'll be showing in New Zealand in June. And, you know, like, again, it doesn't fit, you know, like a lot of with these, you know, with activist films. A lot of the, you know, if it's about the environment or all these other subjects, you know, those are the activist films that that's the activism box that you're allowed to be in. And you're allowed to win awards for those sorts of films. You know, this sort of film, you know, we really have to, you know, really take it on the road and get and build a build an audience for it. It's not going to, you know, be championed by, you know, Netflix or anything like that. We're not we're not expecting that. In fact, we did we did approach Netflix with it and they said this isn't an issue that we want to get in the middle of. So, you know, some, you know, a response like that from which, you know, what is a revolving door company, you know, Susan Rice was on the board. Now she's in the Biden administration Obama left office and got a big fat contract with Netflix. So I don't think we can expect, you know, awards and accolades from the establishment for something like this. But the people want to see it, you know, and there's demand for it. So we're just going to take it to them. And that's what I think will build the audience and the audience will demand the awards rather than these established film centers and things. You have to admire Netflix's frankness there and telling you. I don't think that that stopped him from doing Alex Gibney film, but that's another matter. You're watching CN Live. We're discussing the film Ithaca about son family struggle to free their son and their husband and their brother. We've been speaking with Gabriel Shipton and John Shipton. John, I want to move on to the case right now in a few hours time, like exactly four hours, I think from now. Although most of the viewers, many of the viewers who are watching this, it will have already happened. But right now live, it's four hours away from the Westminster magistrates court sending the extradition order to Preeti Patel, the Home Secretary. This came after the Supreme Court declined to review the appeal from the Assange side to the High Court decision to allow the extradition to go ahead. And that High Court decision was based purely on these assurances that the United States has given that Assange will not be put into special administrative measures to harshest isolation conditions in the West. And then he'll receive adequate medical and health care. The High Court never challenged the fact that the lower court said that he was too sick to be sent to a prison like that. They didn't dare to challenge that America has hell holes for prisons and that Julian's mental health has been so disturbed, but instead they believe these American assurances. So now it goes to Preeti Patel's desk. John, I want to ask you about this. What can you expect from, I mean, I think I know the answer, what do you expect from Preeti Patel? You know, expectations of the virtues of Preeti Patel and not how I run with this thing. Preeti Patel will respond to the politics of the circumstance. This means that an opportunity for Australia to make forceful, firm depositions to Preeti Patel to bring Assange back to Australia, to bring Julian back to Australia, to end this fast. Now, the Deputy Prime Minister of Australia, while in Washington as Deputy Prime Minister, made the statement that if he's done something wrong in the UK, charge him. Otherwise, send him home. This has within it, this statement has within it the understanding that the Espionage Act cannot be applied to Julian, who is a Australian citizen and who at the time of the leaks from Chelsea Manning was in London. I mean, France and Sweden. So it points out that the absurdity and the judicial kidnapping of Julian. Now, the legal part is finished for the moment. Okay, it's four weeks. It'll be on Preeti Patel's desk. It's purely political. So there is no excuse whatsoever for the Australian government to trot out that endless mantra that they do when they don't want to do anything at all, that there's a matter before the court. It's not before the court. It's entirely political at the moment. We expect, we them will make representations to the Australian government to the effect that they bring up Boris Johnson and Preeti Patel and get Julian sent back to Australia. Unfortunately enough, there's an Australian election. I think the day after this four week period ends right around the time when Patel has to make her decision. So wouldn't give enough time for the Australian government probably to do anything about it, at least in this phase. Well, they say, you know, it's a caretaker government. But these are simply excuses. With Kylie Moore Gilbert, the organisation to have her return to Australia from jail in Iran, a 10 year sentence for espionage, by the way, was held at the highest level of ASIS, Australian secret intelligence services. Exchange required three prisoners that were locked up in Thailand, Iranian prisoners, to be picked up by an aeroplane, an Australian aeroplane, a chartered Australian aeroplane. Just for them, picked them up in Bangkok and flew them to Tehran for the exchange. It's a matter of organisation, we're and will, you know, it's not a matter of, oh, we're a caretaker. Oh, it's before the court. Oh, he's had consul assistance. Oh, we can't do anything because the judge is going to make their decision tomorrow. These are simply excuses to acquiesce and thus become complicit over time acquiesce to the persecution of Julian Assange. I can expand upon the deluge of malice that the courts and that the Crown Prosecuting Service and the Swedish Prosecuting Authority have committed themselves to. That I best recommend Nils Melz, Professor Nils Melz, a book, The Pryol of Julian Assange, written when he was the United States, United Nations rapporteur for torture and unusual punishment. It's a wonderful book. Why is Australia so afraid of the United States on this case, John? Well, the thing is, since Whitlam government some years ago in the 70s, Whitlam was moving towards independent. And I think Kevin Rudd had a similar sort of problem in the United States. He has insisted that those people who run our government and those bureaucrats in powerful positions, accede to becoming a sartrappy or a vassal state without any independence. And thus we have become. But the circumstances now have changed considerably. Two things. First of all, there's a commodity supercycle and Australia only produces commodity. Consequently, we are vital. We're strategically vital continent. This gives us power that we didn't weren't able to use before. Secondly, although we are politically feeble, this opportunity can be taken up to develop some political muscle. So that Australia can again begin to negotiate more or less independent on the outside of the United States, but a more or less independent contributor to the United States rather than a vassal state. The government is in a strong position to make representation and to utilize the new circumstances that have unfolded over the last 12 months. Who are the interesting leverage that Australia suddenly has, particularly in this crisis of commodities that are brought about by the sanctions on Russia, which has created enormous shortages. We move on to the issue of Julian's health. There was a substantial change in that in his condition. His condition went on the first day of the hearing in October. He suffered a mini stroke. Now, Vanessa Berets of the magistrates court, based solely on depression, a few other mental conditions and some physical ailments denied his extradition. His condition, health condition, of course, unfortunately is much worse than when Berets ruled. How could this change the case, John, in any way? Well, I can't see, you know, there's no monster colder than the state. I cannot see compassion as one of the elements of state formation and state administration, but I can see political circumstances becoming more and more intense as Julian's health declines further. Well, compassion does exist within Australia and within the United States and within the United Kingdom. The people contain a compassionate outlook and sympathetic and they don't want to see anybody tortured to their death over a period of 14 or 15 years. We don't like that. So that will force and can force the government to act in, sorry, can force, can politically force the government to act in a compassionate manner. No, you may know or may not or may not want to say, but do you know if there will be a request for bail at this hearing today? Well, I don't know. The legal circumstances today, I don't know. They keep us private until the last minute, naturally, because your opponents become aware of things and can prepare for them. Elizabeth, if you have questions about the case today, you are muted now. So sorry. I was wanting to ask you all, you know, should Julian be extradited eventually at the end of this very long process? You know, what can you all do as a family? What can supporters do? What would be the reaction of you all to that? Would you go to the United States? Any thoughts on that? Yes, immediately. You know, the next day I'd be in New York, arraigning people, I mean, sort of bringing. Yeah, so we had very, very good reception in New York. We had 15 cities across the United States. We spoke in the first Press Gallery, that's down in Denver, and then we spoke in the Washington Press Gallery. Interestingly, in Washington Press Gallery is where the collateral murder video was released all those years ago by Julian. You know, the circumstances in the United States are buoyant and strong from the very highest levels of American society, right to the activists and grassroots people like me. So we would be there and we would sort of begin again to build a structure like we'd build in Australia. I can go on, Elizabeth, because the structure that we've built, as I think I mentioned last night, the structure we've built over three years just includes Mexico, the President of Obrador makes statements, very strong statements to have Julian free. In Brazil, 100 members of the parliament in the Assange Group, the same in Chile, the same in Argentina going over to Europe. There's a French National Assembly just last month, debated for an hour in their assembly officially, whether to give asylum to Julian Assange in France. We have a group of 12 in the Norwegian parliament, 25 in the UK parliament, 90 in the Greek parliament. Trying to indicate by this, that this is the tip of an iceberg and the actual power that descends below that tip is the support of people, people all over the world. In France and Germany, in France in particular, in the first place they is 20,000 people who are active supporters on Facebook and Discord and otherwise. In Germany 50,000. So it indicates to you that this is a global concern and a global problem to have global ramifications for ordinary people to be able to access news and for specialists be able to analyze knowledge and make opinions that can guide us. We've sort of begun the campaign in the US already. John and I were there twice last year. I went back for a third time at the end of the year. We're getting congressional support. People speaking, congress members are speaking out against what's going on, the indictment now. We're planning to go back again this year. And also we've raised a significant amount of funds that have been able to resource the campaign. So we've done fundraising through the sale of an NFT, Julian's NFT, which raised around 54 million US dollars. So now, you know, we have the funds to be able to fight on multiple fronts, you know, in the UK against the extradition and also in the US, the legal battle can be intensified there as well. So it sounds like from what you are saying that despite all the propaganda that has surrounded the Assange case for years and years, that there is an upswell now of support. You know, in large part, you know, thanks to the campaigns you'll put on and others. So like I said, despite this propaganda, you're all making headway, sounds like. Yeah, so when you talk about the Mexican president and the parliamentarians in various countries, clearly they get it. They understand what we kill each revealed, particularly about the United States and they are showing that there is even within allied countries of the US enough awareness. That the US is a country that should not have the impunity that it does. John, is that that's a direct result of the releases of the week, isn't it? That awareness. Yes, that awareness. Interestingly, I bumped into a retired Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade official and he said, you know, how's it going, Johnny? You're getting when you went and then he revealed to me that in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, they use D plus on WikiLeaks. They look up stuff. They look up the cables. That's their resource. And if you look another good example is Raphael Correa, when he moved into government. The cables revealed to him that the United States Embassy paid the elite police force. And this, of course, immediately he became aware that this was a real problem. So, and so that's the benefit of the cables. What he immediately did was raise the wages of all other policemen to the level of the elite police. He solved the problem of a coup, you know, very clever. But that's one. There's 95,000 cables. Do you want another example? There's a good example there. Well, here's another example. One of the most important cables out of those 95,000 cables described a circumstance where in outside Baghdad and a group of Americans sold the United States soldiers broke into a house and murdered all the occupants and mother, father, the children and everything. Contemplating this crime, they called in an airstrike and obliterated all the remains of that family from the earth forever. That was in a report, a cable from the United States Ambassador in Baghdad to the State Department. It was read by the parliamentarians and the bureaucrats in Iraq and somehow or other, God knows how, but somehow or other, they gathered up their courage and said, we're not signing the status of forces agreement. So consequently, the United States and its allies had to remove their forces from Iraq. That history didn't, of course, didn't stop there. The United States continued on its journey and fostered ISIS and several other things. But a leak can stop a war, stopped that war, really important to understand the power. If you wish to become as familiar with state means and state diplomacy and state policy, you can become as knowledgeable by reading WikiLeaks D plus as any State Department operative. This is a real gift to people so that we can evaluate how our nations go about their business and where they fit in the hierarchy of power and how they utilise their influence within the hierarchy of power to bring about policies. And whether we agree with those policies or not, we're enabled to take actions to change the policy by knowing that how a policy is administered and who generates it really important. John, no matter what happens going forward in legal case, you've just described a victory, a great victory for the kind of journalism that corporate media has long ceased to do. And the information, the knowledge which you have just laid out there is what WikiLeaks has achieved with Julian Assange has achieved. I want to thank you, John and Gabriel, for joining this interview. I know you're both on the road and you're extremely busy, so I do appreciate your time with us tonight. I'm going to say goodbye now and as we're leaving, we're going to watch. The viewers will see a new, just released video from Doctors for Assange, an update from them. So for Elizabeth Voss, for Kathy Rogan, our producer, this is Joel Oria from CN Live saying goodbye and please stay tuned for the Doctors for Assange update. Thank you. Thank you, John. Thank you, Gabriel. Julian Assange's fiancee Stella Morris announced recently that Mr. Assange had had a mini stroke on October 27, the first day of the latest extradition hearing, according to the Daily Mail. He was reportedly left with a drooping right eyelid memory problems and signs of neurological damage. This dangerous deterioration of Mr. Assange's health underscores urgent concerns raised by Doctors for Assange over the past two years. Therefore, once again, Doctors for Assange calls for Mr. Assange to be released from prison so he can access consistent, high quality, independent medical care, something which is impossible for him to obtain in Belmarsh prison. We reiterate that Mr. Assange is in no condition to undergo an extradition trial. Further, extraditing him to the harsh conditions of the inhumane US prison system should be out of the question. He should therefore be immediately and permanently released from prison. This latest medical emergency adds to the already dire state of Mr. Assange's health owing to his prolonged psychological torture. This includes 11 years of arbitrary detention, medical neglect, solitary confinement, obstruction of access to his lawyers, and an Orwellian legal prosecution that has violated the rule of law and due process, including that key accusations in the US indictment against Mr. Assange are marred by outright lies and a paucity of fact that he and his legal team have been surveilled by the CIA and that Mr. Assange has been targeted by that agency in a plan to kidnap and assassinate him. Throughout Mr. Assange has been subjected to concerted character assassination through propaganda campaigns in mainstream media across the globe. Assurances that Mr. Assange will not be subjected to harsh prison conditions by the very agency that has been plotting to kidnap and assassinate him are farcical. For the high court to accept such a ludicrous proposition, describing the assurances as solemn undertakings offered by one government to another calls into serious question the independence impartiality and integrity of the UK judiciary. The health of Mr. Assange and the health of our democracy, which depends on a free press and judicial integrity are both in serious jeopardy. This shameful and deeply damaging case should be dropped now and Julian Assange granted his long overdue freedom. If you are a consumer of independent news in the first place you should be going to is Consortium News and please do try to support them when you can. It doesn't have its articles behind a paywall. It's free for everyone. It's one of the best news sites out there and it's been in the business of independent journalism and adversarial independent journalism for over two decades. I hope that with the public's continuing support of Consortium News it will continue for a very long time to come. Thank you so much.