PICTURES: Christmas With Julian Assange at Ellingham Hall

Frost over the World - Julian Assange

Assange: If US decide to extradite, final decision will go to UK PM Cameron

Julian Assange has commented on the rumours that the US are likely to mount a case against him and attempt to extradite the campaigner, by saying that it will be "politically impossible" to extradite him to the States, and that the final decision on the matter is likely to rest with Britain's Coalition Government Prime Minister David Cameron.


In an interview with The Guardian newspaper, one of the five WikiLeaks media partners, Assange spoke to the paper at Ellingham Hall, the country mansion where he is currently subject to house arrest. The journalist and editor in chief suggested he believes extradition is unlikely if he can get sufficient backing from the British public. 


"It's all a matter of politics. We can presume there will be an attempt to influence UK political opinion, and to influence the perception of our standing as a moral actor," he said.


The activist went on to comment on the case of Bradley Manning, the US Army Private who is has been in solitary confinement for several months, accused of leaking the 'Cablegate' documents to WikiLeaks. Assange said the US government is "trying to strike a plea deal" with the 23 year old. 


Now facing the prospect of prison, either in Sweden, folllowing the ongoing rape investigation and warrant or the United States for espionage, Assange commented on the reality of solitary confinement, following his recent experiences in Wandsworth Prison.He said: "Solitary confinement is very difficult. But I know that provided there is some opportunity for correspondence I can withstand it. I'm mentally robust. Of course it would mean the end of my life in the conventional sense". He also added that felt he was likely to be assassinated "Jack-Ruby Style" if imprisoned in the US.


Assange has been unhappy with the UK media's recent treatment of the rape allegations against him, and rounded on the Guardian for the manner in which they published the details of the allegations, in Saturday's newspaper, saying they were "sub-selected", and did not put the issues in context. 


The thorny issue of legal costs was also dealt with. The WikiLeaks founder disclosed that legal costs for his defence and that of the organisation were currently running at £500k. He expressed his regret that key credit card companies and payment transaction companies, such as PayPal, Mastercard, Bank Of America, and Visa refused to honour payments made to the organisation, and that this had cost WikiLeaks some 500,000 Euros.


"Legally the UK has the right to not extradite for political crimes. Espionage is the classic case of political crimes. It is at the discretion of the UK government as to whether to apply to that exception" Assange added on the matter of extradition. He expressed his optimism that he would not be sent to the US by the recently installed Liberal-Conservative Coalition Government, lead by David Cameron and Nick Clegg.  "There is a new government, which wants to show it hasn't yet been co-opted by the US."

ESSENTIAL READING: John Humphrys Interview: Transcript and Analysis

Yesterday, the UK's national broadcaster BBC, broadcast an interview on Radio 4 by veteran journalist John Humphrys with Julian Assange. His first face to face interview since he was released from Wandsworth prison on bail, Assange was confronted with the issues raised by the rape allegations, and his reasons for not returning to Sweden, to face further questioning from police and prosecutors.


The most important passages have been highlighted in bold.

ASSANGE ON SWEDEN

Q: Why won't you go back to Sweden?

JA: I have been back. I was there for some five weeks after these initial allegations were made. They were dropped within 24 hours of them first being made. The most senior prosecutor in Stockholm reviewed them and they were dropped. Then politician Claes Borgstrom became involved, other forces became involved and the case, the investigative part of the case, was taken up again. We waited some four/five weeks to be interviewed, so I could put my side of this case forward, and that did not happen.

Q: But it has now.

JA: It did not happen, and then I asked: "OK, I have things to do, I had only planned to be in Sweden for one week, it's time to leave. Is there any problem with that?" For the first three weeks, the Swedish prosecution refused to answer whether it was ok to leave or not. So caught there in limbo. Finally, grudgingly admitted that there was no reason to keep me there. And at that stage I went about my normal course of work. And then they say they want another interview, fine. There's plenty ways to do that. So why can't those things be done?

Q: Why can't you go back to Sweden?

JA: I don't need to go back to Sweden.

Q: You do because the law says you must.

JA: Well no, the law says that I also have certain rights. I do not need to go and speak to random prosecutors around the world who simply want to have a chat and won't do it in any other standard way.

Q: But they don't just want to have a chat, do they?

JA: No, they do.

Q: That rather belittles what this is all about. Very serious allegations have been made. It puzzles a lot of people that you're not saying: "Yes, I want to go to deal with these serious allegations, I will go anywhere they want me to go."

JA: I have already spoken to them.

Q: But they want to talk to you again. That's not uncommon in these cases.

JA: If they want to charge me, they can charge me. They have decided not to charge me.

Q: Yet.

JA: Or they can come to Sweden (or they can come here - JH corrects) or we can do a video link up, or they can accept a statement of mine. They have rejected all of that. And they have asked, as part of their application that, if I go to Sweden and am arrested, that I am to be held incommunicado. Entirely incommunicado. They have asked that my Swedish lawyer be gagged from talking about the evidence to the public.

Q: Everything you say may be true. I've no way of judging that. But, surely you can see how very, very damaging, at the very least, it is to somebody like you, somebody who has spent a large part of his life saying: "People are accountable. We must have systems that do transparency. We must have systems under which the public knows what's going on and people can be held to account." And here you are facing, possibly facing, very, very serious charges indeed, double rape even, is a possibility - and you are saying: "I will not go back to the country where those offences are alleged to have been carried out to face the music."

JA: No, I have never said that.

Q: In that case you can catch the next plane back to Sweden.

JA: No, I do things according to proper process. I stayed in Sweden for five weeks to enable that proper process to occur. Proper process did not occur. I left as part of, you know, just my normal course of activity - no complaints from the Swedish government. I have an organisation to run. I have my people to defend. There are other things at stake here… There are other things at stake here. I have a serious brewing extradition case in relation to the United States. I have a serious organisation to run. People affiliated with our organisation have already been assassinated. My work is serious. I do not have to run off to random states simply because some prosecutor is abusing a process in those states.

Q: No. It is happening because a couple of women have alleged that you seriously assaulted them, sexually assaulted them.

JA: No. One of the witnesses. One of the friends of one of those women, she says that one of the women states that she was bamboozled into this by police and others. These women may be victims in this process.

ON LEAKS BY THE SWEDISH NEWSPAPERS ON DETAILS OF THE CASE

Q: Or they may not be. We can't try the case here, can we? We don't. I don't know enough. I do know what I've read in the newspapers. You know what has been printed in the newspapers. Serious allegations have been made against you.

JA: Most of what we know is, in fact, from the newspapers because somehow the Swedish prosecution has been, deliberately and illegally, selectively taking bits of its material and giving them to newspapers.

Q: Can't you see that it's a bit rum for you to be sitting there under these circumstances. You, Julian Assange, the Wikileaks man, who's become terribly famous, as has your organisation, for leaking material that other people didn't want to see published and here you are saying: "They've leaked something about me."

JA: Not at all. We are an organisation that does not promote leaking. We're an organisation that promotes justice…

Q: You hardly discourage it when you print a couple of million private cables.

JA: … that promotes justice through the mechanism of transparency and journalism.

Q: Based on leaks.

JA: When a powerful organisation that has internal policies, that is meant to be creating and following the law, i.e. Swedish prosecution's judicial system, abuses its own regulation and its own position to attack an individual, that is an abuse of power.

Q: The idea that you have to be dragged back to another country, a civilised country not a banana republic, a civilised country…

JA: A bit more of a banana republic…

Q: It's a country that is respected around the world for its social-democratic system and its rule of law...

JA: That was.

ON BEING SMEARED

Q: All right, your view no longer is that… that you will be dragged back to this country, possibly in handcuffs, to face charges of serious assault, sexual assault, against a couple of women. What impact so you think that will have on your organisation and what sort of figure do you think you, Julian Assange, cut in the face of all this. How will you be regarded? What will it do to you?

JA: I think it will be quite helpful for our organisation.

Q: Really? You see yourself as a martyr then?

JA: I think it will focus an incredible attention on the details of this case and then when the details of this case come out and people look to see what the actions are compared to the reality of the facts, other than that, it will expose a tremendous abuse of power. And that will, in fact, be helpful to this organisation. And, in fact, the extra focus that has occurred over the last two weeks has been very helpful to this organisation.

Q: You don't think it's damaged you at all?

JA: Two days ago I did a search on Google for my name, some 40 million web pages have my name in it. Now, searching for my name and the word "rape", there is some 30 mil web pages. So this has been a very successful smear.

Q: Well, is it the smear and if it is, who is responsible for it?

JA: But when this is undone, that will also be immunising. People will start to see what is really going on.

Q: Just to answer that question then. You think this will be good for you and good for Wikileaks?

JA: I've had to suffer and we've had incredible disruptions.

Q: You do see yourself as a martyr here.

JA: Well, you know, in a very beneficial position, if you can be martyred without dying. And we've had a little bit of that over the past ten days. And if this case goes on, we will have more.

ON THE SUBSTANTIVE DETAILS OF SEX vs RAPE

Q: If all you have is accusation and denial - which is what we have here. We know what the women, you were alleged to have assaulted, have said because we've read it in the newspapers….

JA: Well, they have never said the word "rape". And that is something that is being adduced by other parties.

Q: None the less, people know what they are reported to have said in various forums and that is that you assaulted them in ways that they did not want to be assaulted. That is to say, in one case the woman agreed to have sex with you, apparently she insisted you use a condom, the condom got ripped. In another case the woman said she went to sleep, she woke up and you were trying to have… you were having sex with her without a condom. These are serious allegations. Some people regard them, that second one in particular, as rape. Is there any truth in any of those stories?

JA: No.

Q: No? You deny them completely? But did have sex with the women?

JA: We know there is all sorts of nonsense in the tabloid press and all sorts of spin conducted for all sorts of reasons.

Q: But you haven't denied having sex with those women?

JA: No, I haven't denied that.

Q: So you did have sex with those women?

JA: I have always tried in this case and in my other dealings to be a private person and to not speak about matters that are private.

Q: This is now public. So I'm asking you the question. Did you have sex with those women?

JA: It's a matter of public record as far as the courts are concerned but I am not going to be exposing other people's private lives or my own more than is absolutely necessary. That is not what a gentleman does, that why I have also never criticised these women. We don't know precisely what pressures they have been under, exactly. There are powerful interests that have incentives to promote these smears. That doesn't mean that they got in there in the very beginning and fabricated them.

A HONEY TRAP?

Q: So you're not suggesting that this was a honey-trap? That you were somehow set up by the Americans, by the CIA? You don't buy into that idea because your lawyer's suggested that that's the case.

JA: He says that he was misquoted. I have never said that this is a honey-trap.

Q: You don't believe it?

JA: I have never said that this is not a honey-trap. I'm not accusing anyone until I have proof.

Q: Do you believe it is possible?

JA: That's not how I operate as a journalist because almost everything is possible. I talk about what is probable.

Q: All right, what do you think is probable here?

JA: What is probable? It is less probable that there was that type of involvement at the very beginning. That kind of classic Russian-Moscow thing. That is not probable.

Q: That leaves us with the fact, because you accept this, that one of those women at least did make a complaint against you.

JA: Not even a complaint. It appears, from the records that we do have, the suggestion is that they went to the police for advice and they did not want to make a complaint. What they say is that they found out that they were mutual lovers of mine and they had undertaken sex and they got into a tizzy about whether there was a possibility of sexually transmitted diseases. They went to the police to…

Q: They wanted you to have a test as well.

JA: …to have a test.

Q: Did you have a test?

JA: Ridiculous thing to go to the police about.

SEXUAL PREDATOR or GENTLEMAN?

Q: The allegation against you, the very broad allegation that's been made over and over again in the media over recent days is that you're some sort of sexual predator who has sex with a large number of young women, ideally without a condom, and that you do it because you can, effectively, because in some cases they're groupies or they're enthralled to your fame or whatever it is. Are you a sexual predator?

JA: That's ridiculous. Of course not.

Q: How many women have you slept with?

JA: That's a private business. Not only does a gentleman not tell, not only does a gentleman like to talk about his private life, a gentleman certainly doesn't count.

Q: Many, without being specific?

JA: I've never had a problem before with women. Women have been extremely helpful and generous.

Q: Not quite the question I asked you.

JA: No, women have been extremely helpful and generous and put up with me. But…

Q: Does put up with you mean having you in their beds?

JA: Of course on occasion, I mean I'm an adult man, but women have been generous to me over many years.

Q: In what sense?

JA: You know, in a sense of assisting me with my work, caring for me, loving me and so on. That is what I am used to. So this particular episode in Sweden came as a great shock. The personal shock of having people you're close to doing that, actually much harder to deal with, in a much greater feeling of betrayal than all of these political disputes I have with United States and being sued by banks and so on. Much harder to handle.

WIKILEAKS' ACHIEVEMENTS

Q: What has the Wikileaks leaks achieved, in your view?

JA: Already we see that we have changed governance, we have certainly changed many political figures within governments, we have caused new law reform efforts, we have caused police investigations into the abuses we expose, UN investigations, investigations here in the UK especially in relation to our revelation of the circumstances of the deaths of 109,000 people in Iraq. Before Cablegate, the change is so vast that I cannot, and my whole team cannot, even keep track of it.

Q: Isn't there a danger in the long term that we will know less about the way governments, authorities, various institutions run, because of what you call Cablegate, this release of millions of documents, millions of cables? Because in truth… what people in organisations like MI5 and MI6 will say is: "If we were doing bad things, we won't stop doing bad things, we just won't write them down."

JA: That's something that I thought of before we ever launched this project. It's not so easy. There is a reason why people write things down. Yes, you can organise a small group of people to do something with just word of mouth. But if you want to enact policy, for example, to get Guantanamo Bay guards to do something, get the grunts to do something, you've got to write it down or it will not be followed.

Q: But you do see the difference between transparency, which may or may not be desirable, and accountability, which is always desirable?

JA: Yes of course. I have always said that we are an organisation which is designed to promote justice, through the method of transparency. But we do not put the cart before the horse. We know what is leading this, justice is leading this.

CABLEGATE

Q: You will have released, by the time it's all over - Cablegate - maybe a quarter of a million documents… A lot of it's fascinating. A lot of it's intriguing. But it's tittle-tattle. It's the kind of thing an ambassador would tell his boss at home just because it's something he's found out. In whose interest is it that we should all of this stuff?

JA: With respect it is not tittle-tattle. There's is very, very serious matters in there. When the head of the state or an ambassador is reporting what you call tittle-tattle, it is no longer tittle-tattle. It is either very dangerous poisonous political gossip, or it is the truth.

Q: But do you really believe you can stop people gossiping? Gossip is what makes the world go round? You do it. I do it. Everybody does it.

JA: We try and do it less than other people.

Q: But in whose interest is it that diplomats can no longer speak freely to their own foreign office or whoever it happens to be?

JA: They can speak freely… They just have to start committing things to paper that they are proud of.

Q: This is very different from releasing, for instance, the kind of information that was released relating to sensitive sites, in some cases important security sites. In whose interest was it to do that, apart from people who might potentially benefit, like terrorists?

JA: Your suggestion was that it is tittle-tattle. Now you are saying that this is something that is serious.

Q: I said the vast majority of it was tittle-tattle but I would also suggest to you that some of it was dangerous.

JA: I believe none of it is dangerous. Vastly more detailed things have been released by the United States government itself, by Congress. For example, a year-and-a-half ago it released a list of all US nuclear sites.

Q: But that is for them to decide, because they are the elected government of that nation and they can do that… You are getting leaks illegally.

JA: Not illegally… We have been victorious in every single court case we have ever had. Legality is something for the highest court in the land to decide. It is not what a general claims.

Revealing illegal behaviour is in most countries not illegal. We are a publisher. We accept information from whistleblowers. We vet it, we analyse it and we publish it and that's what we do.

Q: It is illegal to hack into protected sites. It is illegal.

JA: Where is the suggestion that any of the things we have published about government sites have come from illegal hacking?... The allegations are in this case, that an intelligence agent walked out with the material on a CD. That's the allegation.

Q: I'm going to have to end this interview very soon because you have to go off to report to the police for your daily check.

JA: For my high-tech house arrest.

ON BEING A MESSIAH

Q: Just a final thought. Do you see yourself… as some sort of messianic figure?

JA: Everyone would like to be a messianic figure without dying. We are bringing some important change about what is perceived to be the rights of people who expose abuses by powerful corporations and then to resist censorship attacks after the event. We are also changing the perception of the west.

Q: I'm talking about you personally.

JA: I'm always so focussed on my work, I don't have time to think about how I perceive myself… I had time to perceive myself a bit more in solitary confinement. I was perfectly happy with myself. I wondered what that process would do. Would I think "my goodness, how have I got into this mess, is it all just too hard?"

The world is a very ungrateful place, why should I continue to suffer simply to try and do some good in the world. If the world is so viciously against it ,why don't I just go off and do some mathematics or write some books? But no, actually, I felt quite at peace.

Q: You want to change the world?

JA: Absolutely. The world has a lot of problems and they need to be reformed. And we only live once. Every person who has some ability to do something about it, if they are a person of good character, has the duty to try and fix the problems in the environment which they're in.

That is a value, that, yes, comes partly from my temperament. There is also a value that comes from my father, which is that capable, generous men don't create victims, they try and save people from becoming victims. That is what they are tasked to do. If they do not do that they are not worthy of respect or they are not capable.

A Mother's Plea: WikiLeaks Founder No Criminal

Julian Assange is a Symbol

In recent days, the trial-by-media revelations surrounding of Australian journalist and activist Julian Assange have  been seized upon in a variety of ways, by a variety of interest groups.


Firstly, the right wing press have sought to, on the one hand, glamourise the WikiLeaks chief as a kind of James Bond-style Lothario on the one hand, and a creepy nerd on who foists his attentions upon women, on the other hand. These attacks have been part of a wider fundamental dislike and mistrust of the activist, particularly prominent in the American news media, where he has been portrayed as a threat to national security, and akin to Osama Bin Laden. For example, an editorial piece in the Washington Times, Jeffrey T. Kuhner said Assange should be treated in "the same way as other high-value terrorist targets". Similarly the Rupert Murdoch owned right wing news channel, Fox News, has a National Security Analyst, host Kathleen Troia "K.T." McFarland, who has  has referred to Assange as a terrorist, , and Wikileaks "a terrorist organization" calling for Lieutenant Bradley Manning's execution if he is found guilty of being responsible for the leaks that lead to the production and release of the video 'Collateral Murder'. 


The specific accusations of rape against two women in a ten day period in Sweden, allegedly committed in August of this year, it has been widely argued by the left, are a continuation of this line of attack on the journalist, deliberately designed to discredit him and his public profile, and, by association, that of WikiLeaks. This is very much the reasoning Assange has asserted himself, in relation to these allegations.


Meanwhile, the UK's Guardian newspaper this weekend decided to publish the substantive details of the allegations against Assange, which have been leaked to it by Swedish authorities, in a move which the protester says is part of this campaign to discredit him. The claims, although complex, do appear to have some air of legitimacy to them, revealing the actions of a man who is at the least sexually aggressive and irresponsible in his private affairs. The greater problem with the revelations is that they hit a "sweet spot", dividing those on the left where it hurts them most. Feminists and those sympathetic to the female cause have leapt to the defence of the women, and their right to a fair trial, while others on the left are reluctant to tar Assange with the mark of being a rapist, and have instead attacked the women concerned.


While the authorities whose actions have come under scrutiny may rejoice at their good fortune, the greater issue here for those who hope for a better, more open world in which governments do not mislead their public, the problem is that a symbol of that hope has been tarnished. In a very short space of time Julian Assange has gone from being a computer hacker sat in a basement in Melbourne, to the focal point for a worldwide movement, in the same way that Gandhi became a symbol of peace in 30s and 40s India,  and Nelson Mandela became a voice of racial reconciliation in South Africa. 


Such claims may be bold, and at the moment, they hang in the balance, because that symbol is being tampered with, whether it's by an unholy alliance of the authorities and the feminist left, or the poor judgement of the man himself. And while, as much as he Assange is a symbol of a better world, he is also a man made of flesh and blood, and the world should not allow its' idealism to detract from examining his actions, and matching them to the high standards we expect of our elected politicians and leaders.

ANONYMOUS - OPERATION LEAKSPIN

Anonymous, the underground community of online hacktivists behind the recent Denial of Service DDoS attacks on Paypal, Mastercard and Visa, have made an announcement on Youtube about their latest project - Operation Leakspin.

In a dramatic call to arms, the highly secretive organisation has called upon internet users worldwide to examine the contents of the leaked Wikileaks embassy cables and look for more government secrets.

"We, Anonymous, the people, will spread the content of these cables, anywhere we can, until all the world will know the injustices perpetrated upon the people by governments worldwide”, the narrator says in the video. “Please do the same. Help us win this war. Help. Produce, Be Free. Because we are Anonymous, you are Anonymous.”  Check out the full video, below.

The Wikileaks Bunker : IMAGE

This is an image from the Pionen centre, a bunker 30 metres underground in a former Cold War bunker, where all the Wikileaks data is stored. The centre is in Stockholm, Sweden is a huge cave carved into granite stone, far below Vita Berg Park in the city, and houses tens of storage servers which hold information for various organisations including Wikileaks.


The facility includes a "floating" conference room, lunar-landscape flooring, suspended glass corridors, and many more intriguing design features.The location was chosen specifically because the jurisdiction affords legal protection to the whistleblowing site, and and those who pass it information.

Face to Face -Julian Assange -04-11-2010 Interview with Analysis

This video, from November, shows an interview with Julian Assange, Editor in chief of Wikileaks, in which he discusses the details behind the video entitled 'Collateral Murder'.

A play on the military euphemism 'collateral damage', the video shows the death of 18 Iraqi civilians in Baghdad, including two Reuters journalists, who are fired upon repeatedly by a US Apache helicopter.

In Assange's analysis of the events, he says expresses his disappointment at the behaviour of the soldiers and pilots responsible for the deaths, for whom such actions, it appears, such manoeuvres have become routine.

"It seems to be a type of debasement of war - you expect people to be debased by war, their characters' to be corrupted by engaging in war. But because of the removed nature of the Apache, where they can't hear anyone on the ground....it looks like a video game to them."

"Over time these pilots started thinking it really was a video game. and they got pleasure by getting a high score, and it was also a source of pride to them". Assange goes on to express concern at the manner in which the pilots knew the rules of engagement, followed them, and were later exonerated by an internal investigation which exonerated them of any blame. "Either there's a problem with that review, in the United States military, or those really were the rules, and the review panel was also acting in the right way. Then there's a problem with the rules."

Julian Assange TED Global Conference Interview

In an interview from the TED conference in Oxford in July of this year, Julian Assange was interviewed.


Check out the video of the interview here. 


The interview dealt with the Wikileaks leak of surveillance video relating to the killing of 18 Iraqi civilians, including 2 Reuters news journalists by US forces.'Collateral Murder', as it was known. In the inteview, Assange (pictured, right) also revealed his motivations for revealing information which is classified.


"There's a question as to what information is important in the world, what sort of information can achieve reform", he told interviewer Chris Anderson, CEO of TED (pictured, left). "Information that organisations are spending economic effort into concealing, that's a really good signal that when that information gets out, there's a hope of it doing some good. Because the organisations that know it best, that know it inside out are spending work to conceal it. and that's what we've found in practice, and that's what journalism is."


Anderson also went on to ask about Assange's background and youth, commenting that he understood the hacker to have attended 37 schools as a child. "My parents were in the movie business, and then on the run from a cult, so the combination of the two (meant I had to go to so many schools)", he explained. Probed on his background as a hacker, Assange instead asserted that he I was a young "journalistic-activist". "I wrote a magazine, and was prosecuted when I was a teenager". He went on to suggest that the he disliked the "hacker" as it had had been devalued as it was being used for financial, fraudulent criminal purposes.


Asked further to explain his values, he said "capable, generous men do not create victims, they nurture victims. That's something (I learned) from my father, and from other capable, generous men that has been in my life." He did go on to say that he himself was more confrontational than caring. "I'm a combative person, so I'm not actually so big on the nurture. There is another way to nurture victims, and that is to police perpetrators of crime, and that is something that has been in my character for a long time".

Julian Assange: 'Victim of a Smear Campaign'

Assange: Rape Charges were a "set up"

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has gone on ABC television to make a spirited defence of his innocence in the face of rape allegations made by two women in Sweden. The hacker says texts between the women have been intercepted which prove that the allegations are false.


“There are intercepted SMS messages between the women and each other and their friends that I'm told represents a set up,” Assange, who spoke from Suffolk, UK, to ABC'sGood Morning America television programme. “Those SMS messages the Swedish prosecutor has refused to release and in fact stated that my lawyer, who was shown the messages by the police, is gagged from speaking about them.”


Porn baron Larry Flynt has today announced that he is donate $50,000 to the campaign to support the whistle-blowing site, which intends to expose the world of banking next.



“If WikiLeaks had existed in 2003 when George W. Bush was ginning up the war in Iraq, America might not be in the horrendous situation it is today, with our troops fighting in three countries (counting Pakistan) and the consequent cost in blood and dollars,” Assange has also written, in defence of his controversial organisation, inThe Huffington Post.


You can see the interview here.